TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 134
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e are sent to various sites for erection of transmission towers. The work is carried out using these materials by their own employees or by contractors. The said tower after erection is used for putting up the aluminium wires for transmission of electricity. Though in the present appeal the appellants are contesting the applicability of unjust enrichment on the refund claim filed by them, the origin of the issue is very old. A dispute arose in 1976 regarding Central Excise Duty liability of the appellant on the activities undertaken by them erection of transmission towers. After many stages of litigation up to Hon'ble Supreme Court, on 03.03.2006 the appellant filed a refund claim for Rs. 2,78,57,023/-. The Jurisdictional Deputy Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....either the transmission tower nor the transmission lines were sold to any other person and no consideration has been received for the use of towers or line from any customer. Even the question of passing the duty incidence, which in any case was paid under protest, indirectly through sale of electricity also will not arise. It is an admitted fact that the pricing of electricity is done according to the Government Policy and has no relevance on the various expenditure incurred by the appellants. In a similar situation in the case of PCC Poles, which were not sold to any other party the Tribunal held that there is no unjust enrichment vide final order No.A/544/02-NB (SM) dated 02.05.2002. 4. The ld. Counsel for the appellant further relied o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is that the tariff for the electricity is different for different category of customers and decided and fixed by the State. It is also admitted fact that prior to and during the impugned period, there is no change in the tariff rate of the electricity. The appellants in a written affidavit dated 17.06.2003 categorically submitted the various details regarding their operations. It is clear that the tariff rates for electricity were fixed by the State as a matter of administrative policy keeping in view the various considerations. The points relevant to fix the tariff, which determines the income of the appellant organization will cover cross subsidy, Government subsidy, paying capacity of various category of consumers and rationalization. It....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....heir fund. There is no identity of different funds and individual records for different receipts for a one to one co-relation as to which money has gone to which expenditure. Such stipulation will be impracticable. 6. We find that the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. 1997 (89) ELT 247 (SC) is relevant in this case. The Hon'ble Madras High Court relying on the said decision of the Apex Court held in C.C.E vs. Superintending Engineer, T.N.E.B. (supra) that unjust enrichment has no application in a situation like the present one. The Hon'ble Madras High Court observed as below:- 10. As rightly relied on by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court, in....