2007 (10) TMI 507

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has preferred the present appeal. I have heard Shri C. Lama, ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue and Shri D.H. Natkarni, ld. Advocate for the respondent. 2. As per the facts on record, the respondent M/s. Mitesh Brothers are merchant exporters, they obtained free ad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... finally gets settled by the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The only dispute which survives is as to whether the respondent's refund claim would be hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. It was not their stand before Commissioner (Appeals) that inasmuch as the assessments were provisional, they would not attract unjust enrichment in terms of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's deci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see, Commissioner (Appeals) held in their favour. 5. The Revenue in their memorandum of appeal have only assailed that though the provisional assessment order was passed by the Asst. Commissioner, but the same was not followed by the assessee inasmuch as duty was paid on the higher assessable value and also under bond was executed. However, I find that irrespective of the fact of the asses....