2014 (8) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... order denying the refund claim. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of cables and they cleared their goods against the tenders issued by the MTNL/DOT for supply of cable. As per the tenders, the price was fixed provisional and was required to be finalized at the time of payment. The appellant paid duty on the provisional price which were later on finalized ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uyers, therefore they are entitled for refund of excess duty paid by them. It is further submitted that whatever payment have received by them, the same is to be treated as final payment of goods supplied by them. It is further contended that during the relevant period, the provisions of unjust enrichment were not in the statute book. Therefore, the doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable ....