2017 (4) TMI 892

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Consultant for the Respondent ORDER [Order Per: Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] 1. The above appeal is fled by the department against the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the sanction of refund claim of assessee. 2. The respondents were earlier operating as an EOU and in the month of November, 2011 they intimated their intention to exit from EOU scheme. Accordingly, they pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....department, the Ld. AR Shri M. Chandra Bose, Joint Commissioner, submitted that the appellants had paid duty on the goods at the time of de-bonding from EOU scheme. They had again paid duty on the said goods at the time of clearance in DTA. The Central Excise duty paid by them while clearing the goods in DTA was collected from the customers. Therefore, the said excise duty paid by the respondents ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... collected from their customers, the same is hit by unjust enrichment and therefore the said duty is also not refundable though they have paid duty twice. 4. Against this, the Ld. Consultant Shri S.C. Choudhury, appearing on behalf of the respondent, reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the excise duty was paid on the finished goods twice. Therefore, respondent havin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at this amount cannot be refunded, since it would tantamount of non fulfilment of mandatory requirement for de-bonding. The duty has been paid second time by the respondent while clearing the goods in DTA. This amount also cannot be refunded as it is hit by unjust enrichment since the duty has been collected by respondent from the customers. When the duty is paid by the respondent as a mandatory c....