2026-VIL-1339-CESTAT-HYD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise – Recovery of sanctioned refund - Doctrine of unjust enrichment - Recovery of refund already sanctioned on the assumption that the said refunds were erroneously granted - Credit notes issued for duty paid in excess - Whether refunds already sanctioned based on final appellate orders can be recovered merely on ground of unjust enrichment without considering that duty burden was not passed on to customers – HELD - The Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal specifically observed in final order that there is no unjust enrichment as appellant assessee had not passed on incidence of duty to any other person. The Bench noted findings of Commissioner (Appeals) that price had not been fixed in view of fluctuating market prices and appellant had not collected extra amount - Appellant had taken back incidence of duty initially passed on by crediting buyer's accounts at end of every month with disputed amount of duty - Appellant duly submitted Chartered Accountant's certificate stating duty burden not passed on to customers - Supreme Court in Addison & Co. Ltd. observed that when assessee has duly submitted CA certificate to effect that duty burden not passed the assessee should not be denied claim of refund – The bar of unjust enrichment not applicable where duty amount initially charged has been returned back by assessee by issuing credit notes - Maxims require no man should be vexed twice for same cause and there must be end to litigation otherwise rights of persons would be in endless confusion. The earlier judgment cannot be reopened or reviewed on basis of subsequent judgment - When there is no case of unjust enrichment entire basis of raising demand on grounds of unjust enrichment cannot be sustained - Impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page