2011 (11) TMI 162

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dt.16.05.2000, held that the refund along with interest is admissible to the appellant for the duty paid by him for procurement of diesel oil engines. This decision was not challenged by Revenue and has attained finality.  However, after issue of the order by Commissioner (Appeals), a Show Cause Notice was issued by Deputy Commissioner on 07.12.2000. The Show Cause Notice read with the corrigendum dt.22.12.2000 proposes rejection of refund claims on account of unjust enrichment on the ground that the appellant had already claimed duty drawback. However, in the adjudication order issued consequent to issue of Show Cause Notice, refund claims were rejected on the ground that the copies of shipping bill....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....He drew my attention to the order dt.4.8.04 and submitted that the observations made therein that the documents were not called for and not produced, is not correct in view of the fact that Show Cause Notice issued and corrigendum related to duty drawback and unjust enrichment only and there was no mention of non-submission of documents. As regards unjust enrichment and duty drawback, the issue has been settled in their favour and therefore denial of interest on the ground that the appellant had not furnished the documents initially is baseless.   4. I have considered the submissions made by the ld.Counsel. I find that in this case, interest on refund claim has been rejected on the ground that the appellant had not produced the relev....