2017 (5) TMI 1178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... authority sanctioning refund of Rs. 1,00,57,305/- on account of eligibility for duty-free import of 'conventional billet turning lathe' in bill of entry no.IMP-B-000220 dated 13^th May 2004. 2. It would appear that at the time of import, for no apparent reason, the eligibility for exemption under notification no.39/96-Cus dated 23^rd July 1996 was denied. The appellant paid duty and sought a refund claim on the ground of entitlement which was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. In the said order, he found that the necessary certificates had been presented and that he was satisfied, on the basis of non-enrichment certificate, that the refund amount could be disbursed to the applicant. Aggrieved by this, Commissioner of Cust....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o the Fund. In allowing the appeal filed against the order of the original authority, the first appellate authority, despite rendering a finding of ineligibility on account of unjust enrichment, has not transferred the amount sanctioned to the Fund. The setting aside of the order of the lower authorities is, therefore, not sustainable in law. 5. A question that naturally arises is the applicability of the doctrine of unjust enrichment. In the appeal of Revenue against the refund order, the first appellate authority has held that the importer is not outside the scope of the application of this doctrine as they sell their products to agencies other than that of Ministry of Defence and it had then been argued that the decision of the Hon'bl....