2025 (7) TMI 1766

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant had filed application of refund of Rs. 11,05,908/- in respect of coastal conversion of vessel "MV Endurance". The said vessel was converted from 'foreign run to 'coastal' on 06.03.2014 at Muldwarka Port and the appellant filed Bill of Entry dated 05.03.2014 which was assessed provisionally to Customs duty amounting to Rs.34,42,294/- and paid on 05.03.2014 by the appellant. Subsequently, at the time of final assessment on 24.09.2014, the duty liability was reduced to Rs.23,36,386/-. The appellant filed refund claim of Rs.11,05,908/- for the excess payment of duty. The Assistant Commissioner, Customs Division, sanctioned this refund. While sanctioning the refund claim, the adjud....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....om the order mentioned above, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) came to the conclusion that appellant failed to discharge the onus casted upon them under Section 18 clause (5) of the Customs Act, 1962 and hence the refund is not admissible and rejected the appeal. Against this order of Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant is aggrieved and has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the issue to be decided by this Tribunal is whether the doctrine of unjust-enrichment is applicable in case of refund of excess duty paid in respect of 'coastal run' by the vessel. He further submitted that in the decided case of Commissioner of Cus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e vs. Agrotech Food Limited - 2010 (249) ELT 348 (Kar.) (c) Atlantic Shipping Pvt. Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar - 2013 (294) ELT 275 The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Customs, vs. Mangalore Agrotech Food Limited (supra) has held that in case of adjustment of amount paid on provisional assessment, doctrine of unjust-enrichment is not attracted. 2.1 The learned Counsel for the appellant also submitted that the demand is not hit by unjust-enrichment as the incidence of the duty has been borne by the appellant and the same has been certified through Chartered Accountant's certificate. In the books of account of the appellant it has bee....