2010 (12) TMI 1017

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Respondent. [Order]. - There are two applications before me, both filed by the appellant, one for rectification of what is said to be "apparent mistake" in the final order passed by this Bench and the other for issue of specific directions to the original authority, in regard to the refund claim of the appellant. 2. Final Order No. A/69-70/2010 dated 20-1-2010 [2010 (261) E.L.T. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s case. Elaborating the point, the learned counsel submits that the bar of unjust enrichment cannot be applied to a claim for refund of credit of duty paid on the excisable goods used as inputs. In this connection, he refers to clause (c) of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. He has also relied on the following decisions of the Tribunal in the cases of : (1) C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (c) of the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act is squarely applicable and, therefore, the original authority has to consider the refund claim without reference to unjust enrichment. This will not mean that Section 11B of the Act is altogether inapplicable. Mention of this provision of law shall, therefore, remain in the final order. Nevertheless, for the ends of ju....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise, Amravati Division, which requires the appellant to file a fresh refund claim in the proper form. In the present application, the appellant seeks appropriate directions to the original authority. The learned counsel submits that the original refund claim dated 18-5-2004 has to be disposed of by the Assistant Commissioner in terms of the remand ordered by this Bench. The learned JDR in this....