2018 (6) TMI 1410 – CESTAT HYDERABAD – TMI – Refund of Education Cess on counter veiling duty – rejection on the ground of limitation and also on the ground of unjust enrichment – Held that:- In the case in hand, the authorities have not returned or rejected the refund claims filed by the appellant which was within time – the refund claim stands filed within one year of the amount paid wrongly, supporting documents were filed beyond the period of one year does not make the refund claim hit by limitation – refund cannot be rejected on this ground.
–
Unjust enrichment – Held that:- The appellant had filed the refund claim when he had already passed on the amount to his suppliers by raising a bill – It is also undisputed that the credit n
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
in had filed refund claims of the amounts paid on Customs duty i.e. Education Cess on counter veiling duty. The said refund claim came to be rejected on the ground of limitation as well as on the question of unjust enrichment. 4. Appellant had sought the refund of the amounts paid on 13.05.2013/20.05.2013 and filed the refund claim online on 26.12.2013. Appellants were informed in January, 2014 to submit supporting documents for the refund claim filed which was done so on 23.07.2014 after a delay of more than six months and lapse of one year from the date of payment of duty/ interest. It is also noticed that, appellant filed the refund claim in the present case consequent to issuance of credit notice which was issued on 10.07.2014 indicates
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
d and on the reason of limitation, I find that both the lower authorities have erred in coming to such a conclusion. Undisputedly, the refund claim stands filed within one year of the amount paid wrongly, supporting documents were filed beyond the period of one year does not make the refund claim hit by limitation, is the ratio that can be deduced from the order of Tribunal in the case of Duraline India Pvt. Ltd. In the case in hand, the authorities have not returned or rejected the refund claims filed by the appellant which was within time. Hence the findings of the lower authorities held that the refund claims was filed beyond the period of limitation is in correct and is findings are struck down. 8. However, I find that appellant is not
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =