2005 (2) TMI 227

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ration is whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment under Section 27 of the Customs Act is applicable to imported capital goods used captively for the manufacture of excisable goods. On this issue decisions have been cited by both sides. On behalf of the appellants, it has been argued that the decision of this Bench in Grasim Industries v. CCE, Chennai-III [2003 (157) E.L.T. 123 (Tri. - Chennai)] ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;     CC (Imports), Mumhai v. Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. - [2001 (135) E.L.T. 878] (ii)    Godrej Pacific Technology Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai - [2003 (157) E.L.T. 410 (T) = 2003 (58) RLT 454 (CESTAT - Mum.)]. (iii)   ONGC v. CCE - [2003 (156) E.L.T. 794 (Tri-Del.)]. (iv)   CCE, Chennai v. Ranga Alloys Ltd. - [2002 (l05) ECR 147 (Tribunal)]. (v)&n....