2011 (11) TMI 155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Commissioner (Appeals) No. 33/2009 (H-II) Cus dated 13.7.2009 by which the order No. 31/2009 (Refunds) dated 15.4.2009 of the original authority rejecting refund claim of Rs. 1,79,198/- was upheld.  2. Heard both sides. 3.1 This  matter is before the Tribunal for the second time after a protracted litigation. The relevant facts are that the appellant imported 'Intel Dot Stations' ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 1318/2010 dated 27.10.2010 allowed the appeal of the party by setting aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowing the appeal with consequential relief. 3.3 The present proceedings related to the refund claim of excess duty paid by the appellant assessee in respect of Bill of Entry No. 3910 dated 28....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case as narrated by the learned Counsel. He also submits that the rejection of the refund claim by the original authority was only on the ground of time bar and  that aspect of unjust enrichment has not been examined by the authority below. 6.1 I have carefully considered the submissions by both sides and perused the records. In identical situation, the appellants have imported two consi....