The Commnr. of Central Excise, Hyderabad v. M/s. I.T.C. Bhadrachalam

May 1, 2015

(2015) 15 SCC 376

Excise — Central Excise — Appeal to Supreme Court — Central Excise Act, 1944 — S. 11-B — Unjust enrichment — Held, the payment in question for which refund was sought was made under protest and also that the assessee had not passed on the burden of excise duty, so paid, to the ultimate consumers and therefore the question of unjust enrichment does not arise in the instant case — The appeal is dismissed

Print 🖨 PDF 📄

(A.K. Sikri and Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.)

The Commnr. of Central Excise, Hyderabad ___ Appellant

M/s. I.T.C. Bhadrachalam __________________Respondent

Civil Appeal No. 1351 of 2005, decided on May 1 2015

The Order of the court was delivered by

Order

One significant aspect which emerges from the record in the form of finding of the Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation between the same parties is that the payment in question for which refund was sought was made under protest and also that the assessee had not passed on the burden of excise duty, so paid, to the ultimate consumers. On these facts the question of unjust enrichment in the present case does not arise. Therefore, it is not necessary to deal with the issue as to whether Section 11B of the Central Excise Act would be applicable in the present case or not.

The appeal is dismissed on the aforesaid terms. The amount in question shall be refunded to the respondent along with interest within a period of three months from today.

———

You may also like