Refund not hit by unjust enrichment as CA certifies that duty has not been passed on furnished

Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Vs Deepak Cables India Ltd (CESTAT Chennai)

CESTAT Chennai held that refund is not hit by unjust enrichment as chartered accountant certificate duly furnished satisfying that the duty has not been passed on.

Facts- The assessee is engaged in the manufacture of ACSR Conductors. They had filed a refund claim on 26.10.2009 for Rs. 60,10,076/- towards downward price revision based on the negative supplementary invoices raised to M/s. Power Grid Corporation India Limited (M/s. PGCL in short). The refund claim was returned to the assessee for defects and the same was resubmitted along with a Chartered Accountant Certificate. A Show Cause Notice dated 11.02.2010 was issued to the assessee proposing to reject the refund claim, on the ground of unjust enrichment. After due process of law, the original authority vide Order-in-Original No. 17/2010 dated 22.06.2010 rejected the refund claim.

Conclusion- The case of the department is that the assessee has collected the excess duty from M/s. PGCL. Assessee has furnished a certificate issued by M/s. PGCL to show that M/s.PGCL has not reimbursed the amount to the assessee. They have also furnished a Chartered Accountant Certificates along with both refund claims to prove that the said amount was shown as receivables under the head “Loan and Advances” in their financial statement. In the case of CCE, Coimbatore Vs. Flow Tech Power reported in 2006 (202) ELT 404 (Mad.), the Hon’ble High Court of Madras had held that when the assessee has submitted the Chartered Accountant certificate to prove that the duty has not been passed on to their customers, the refund is not hit by unjust enrichment.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.