2019 (3) TMI 948

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....und claim of Rs. 3,22,73.106/- on the ground that they had cleared Motor spirits and High Speed Diesel to their various depots and other OMCs (Oil Manufacturing Companies) on 4th & 5th June, 2008 at the higher rate of duties due to some technical limitation (the system could be update ) though the Finance Ministry, by virtue of Notification No. 30/08-CE dated 04.06.2008, reduced the rate of duty. This resulted into excess payment of duty which was claimed as refund by the appellant. The refund has been sanctioned by the adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original dated 30.10.2009. However, the refund amount has been credited to Consumer Welfare Fund under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 11B of the Act. Being aggr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ort of the above submissions. • 2014 (302) ELT 67 (T) CCE Vs. LOCL • 2008 (228) ELT 131 (T) Dabur India Ltd. Vs. CCE • 2008 (225) ELT 497 (T) • Flat India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC (Import) 3. He further submits that in absence of any counter to the Chartered Accountant's clear cut certificates certifying that non-inclusion of differential higher duty and accounting of the differential higher duty to the head "Amounts Receivable/Recoverable from the Revenue" the Department cannot apply the principle of unjust-enrichment, unless it produces counter evidence of another Chartered Accountant or expert in the field. In this context, he placed reliance on the following judgments. • Mangal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e following judgments, by relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd 1997 (89) ELT 247 (SC). • Sescot Sheet Metal Works Ltd.-2015 (321) ELT 545 (Mad.) • Superintending Engineer, TNEB-2014 (300) ELT 45 (Mad.) • Karnataka State Agro Corn Products Ltd-2006 (202) ELT 47 (Kar.) 6. On the other hand, Sh. Sameer Chitkara Ld. Additional Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 7. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that in the present case limited issue of unjust-enrichment needs to be decided as otherwise refund claim was already sa....