2012 (11) TMI 697

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Mall for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The issue involved in the present appeal is whether the appellant is eligible for the refund of the penalty paid by them after penalties were set aside in the appeal proceedings. Refund claim of Rs.81,799/- and interest of Rs.6,000/- has been credited to Consumer Welfare Fund on the ground that the appellants have not been able to show that the liability has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....chment is not applicable for penalty. This has been distinguished by placing reliance upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Keihin Fie (P.) Ltd. v. CCE 2009 (16) STR 71 (Tri. - Mumbai). Unfortunately both the original adjudicating authority and the appellate authority have nowhere indicated whether the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Keihin Fie Pvt. Ltd. was relating to penalty ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....just enrichment' have been applied insofar as the fine or penalty is concerned": This shows that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay supports the claim of the appellant that in respect of the penalty unjust enrichment principle cannot be applied. Similar was the view taken in GIS Cotton Mill Ltd. which relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Industrial Cables (I) Ltd. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see as in the case of duty. The learned A.R. on this basis submitted that once the penalty amount is shown as an expenditure, it has to be presumed that the burden has been passed on since the same principle has been applied in the case of duty and interest in several decisions of the Tribunal. I am not able to find myself in agreement with this view. If this view is accepted, it would mean that w....