2023 (3) TMI 844

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal Order No.686 of 2012 dated 14.06.2012. 2. The issue that arises for consideration is whether doctrine of unjust enrichment would apply to claims of refund made prior to the introduction of Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Section 27 (1A) of the Customs Act, 1962, and also the applicability of the above doctrine to capital goods, raw material/ test material. 3. The Respondent imported HR Stainless Steel Coil in the year 1982 by paying duty under merit and accepting assessment under CTH 7315. Thereafter, an application was made by the Respondent seeking grant of project concession in respect of the above-mentioned imports. 4. The claim of the Respondents was rejected by the Group for project import, which was uphe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nts are entitled to refund on the premise that there was no provision regarding unjust enrichment at the time when the imports were made. The doctrine of unjust enrichment was legislatively incorporated only on 20.09.1991 and in any view the Respondents have also demonstrated that the duty was not passed on, which conclusion was arrived on the basis of an affidavit wherein they have given an undertaking to compensate the department in case it was found that the duty was passed on. Reliance was also placed on the Audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, wherein it was observed that the amounts are due to be received by the Department. 7. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal, challenging the orders of the Tribunal it appears to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent evidenced in the Act and must exercise jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of law. ......... 45. From the above discussion, it is clear that the doctrine of "unjust enrichment" is based on equity and has been accepted and applied in several cases. In our opinion, therefore, irrespective of applicability of Section 11-B of the Act, the doctrine can be invoked to deny the benefit to which a person is not otherwise entitled. Section 11-B of the Act or similar provision merely gives legislative recognition to this doctrine. That, however, does not mean that in the absence of statutory provision, a person can claim or retain undue benefit. Before claiming a relief of refund, it is necessary for the petitioner-appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 86 ELT 177] . Though that case is concerned with the exemption of raw naphtha which was used to produce ammonia which is used in effluent treatment plant. Notification No. 187/61-CE provided for exemption to such raw naphtha as is used in the manufacture of ammonia provided such ammonia is used elsewhere in the manufacture of fertilisers. The question was as to whether the ammonia used in the offsite plants is also ammonia which is used elsewhere in the manufacture of fertilisers? The court answered the question in the affirmative, thereby holding that exemption provided under Notification No. 187/61-CE shall be available to the assessee. 10. However, what follows from the reading of the said judgment is that if a particular mater....