SPECTRUM FABRICS Vs. CC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against tile decision of the lower authorities crediting the refund of Rs. 3,09,690/ - sanctioned to them to consumer welfare fund on the ground that appellants have not been able to establish that there was no unjust enrichment. No one has appeared on behalf of the appellants. However a letter has been received submitting that the matter may be decided on merits.

(2.) THE learned DR submits that in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. v. CCE & Cus. Reported in : 2005 (181) ELT 328 (S.C.) and Union of India v. Solar Pesticide Pvt. Ltd. reported in : 2000 (116) ELT 401 (S.C.), the appellants have to establish that there was no unjust enrichment. He also submits that appellants did not appear for personal hearing before the original authority even though several opportunities were given. After hearing the submissions, I find that the Commissioner in the impugned order has considered the eligibility for refund in detail and I find myself in full agreement with the view taken by him. In this case goods were obtained by the appellants on execution of a bond and at that time they had made the payment. Therefore the decisions cited by the appellants in their appeal memorandum all of which relate to deposits made by assessees/parties during investigation are not applicable. Once the duty is paid at the time of release of goods, the burden to prove unjust enrichment would straightway fall on the party. In this case what has been paid is duty and it can by no imagination be called a deposit. For better appreciation I reproduce the relevant para of the Commissioner (Appeals) decision with which I fully agree.