TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (7) TMI 89
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 24-6-2005 upholding the Order- in-Original No. 4/2003-C.E., dated 24-7-2003 wherein the Asst. Commissioner has held that the assessments were provisional and after the finalization, the assessee was entitled for refund, as claimed by them. The Tribunal by Final Order Nos. 1130 and 1131/2002, dated 22-8-2002 had remanded the matter to the Asst. Commissioner to examine the plea as to whether th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7 (S.C.) and CCE, Mumbai-II v. Allied Photographics (India) Ltd. - 2004 (166) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). The Revenue is aggrieved with this order and contends that the provisions of unjust enrichment would apply even in similar circumstances. They have filed a Miscellaneous Application producing all the copies of the order of finalization in the matter. 2. The learned JDR reiterates the grounds taken by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e by both the sides, we notice that it is clear from the impugned order that the refund arose as a result of finalization of provisional assessment. It is very clear from the facts of the case that no part of duty was time barred as assessments were still provisional. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has held that the refund is hit by provisions of unjust enrichment and the amounts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld be rejected. 4. On a careful consideration, we notice that the Tribunal by Final Order Nos. 1130-1131/2002, dated 22-8-2002 had remanded the matter for de novo to the Asst. Commissioner to examine the issue as to whether the assessments were provisional or not. The Asst. Commissioner after detailed scrutiny of all the documents clearly came to the conclusion that the assessments were provision....