1993 (9) TMI 189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant that the burden of import duty was not passed on to the consumers was not accepted by the A.C. who held that the grant of refund claim to the party would amount to undue enrichment and accordingly rejected the refund claim. This order of the A.C. was confirmed by the Collector (Appeals). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants had imported acrylic fibre. The customs authorities while allowing the clearance of acrylic fibre charged basic import duty which was prevailing at the time of expiry of the said bond instead of the duty prevailing on the date of payment. The material on which duty was paid was consumed in the factory as raw materials for manufacture of acrylic yarn. 3. Shri R.S. Saini, Ld. Consulta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ylic yarn; that the Department has miserably failed to prove that the excess duty paid has been passed on to the customers or any drawback has been claimed for it and that the two orders passed by the A.C. and the Collector (Appeals) are based on presumption, surmises and assumption without having any documentary evidence to substantiate them and therefore prayed that the orders passed may be set aside and relief granted to the appellants. 4. From the records it is seen that during the course of earlier hearing, the Ld. Consultant was directed to peruse the judgment of the Apex Court on the question of unjust enrichment holding that Central Excise & Customs Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 which came into operation from 20-9-1991 have retrospe....