Case Law Details
Pr. Commissioner of Customs Central Tax Vs Sachdev Overseas Fitness Pvt Ltd (CESTAT Hyderabad)
CESTAT Hyderabad held that all the evidence leads to the conclusion that duty element is treated as an expenditure and not as receivables. Accordingly, as the duty incidence is passed on and therefore hit by doctrine of unjust enrichment.
Facts- The present appeals are filed by the Department contesting that the refund claim filed by Respondents for refund of Customs Duty paid in excess is hit by the bar of unjust enrichment and the refund amount needs to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
Conclusion- In the present case, barring CA certificate, no other evidence has been produced by the Respondents before the Adjudicating Authority. As against this, the Department has clearly brought out certain evidence like the Respondents having not shown this amount as “receivables” in their books of account during the relevant time or not having produced any documents etc., as envisaged under Section 28C of the Customs Act. All these evidence leading to the conclusion that they have treated the duty as an element of expenditure and therefore, forming part of the Profit & Loss account and not as receivables. It is also noted that they were aware that reassessment would lead to refund and they were also aware about the exact amount of refund which would be admissible to them on merits, and despite that they had not shown this amount as receivables in any of their books of account. Therefore, in the facts of the case, they have clearly not been able to clear the bar of unjust enrichment by not having produced sufficient evidence before the original authority.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT KOLKATA ORDER
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
