SIPANI AUTOMOBILES LTD. Vs. CC (APPEALS)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in this Appeal, filed by M/s. Sipani Automobiles Ltd., is whether the refund of Customs duty paid by them is available to them and whether bar of unjust enrichment is applicable.

(2.) Shri Krishna Kant, learned Advocate, mentioned that the appellants imported parts of motor vehicles for manufacture of Montego cars under 32 Bills of Entry; that as the Customs Authorities were of the view that they had in fact imported cars in terms of Rule 2(a) of the Rules. For interpretation of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, the benefit of Notification No. 72/93 was denied and they were asked to pay an additional duty @ 15%; that the Appellate Tribunal vide Final Order Nos. 745 to 769/96 -B dated 10.9.96 [CC, Bombay v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. and Sipani Automobiles Ltd. v. CC, Bangalore, 1996 (16) RLT 646 (CEGAT) held that they are eligible for the benefit under Notification No. 72/93 -Cus., that immediately after the receipt of the Final Order, they filed the refund claim on 28.9.1996 for refund of the Customs duty paid in excess by them and the redemption fine deposited by them; that the Assistant Commissioner, under Order -in -Original No. 203/97 dated 5.5.1997 rejected the refund claim in respect of two Bills of Entry Nos. 660 dated 5.7.94 and 996 dated 29.9.94 as the same were not part of the Final Order passed by the Tribunal; that the Assistant Commissioner allowed the remaining refund claim but ordered amount of refund to be credited into the Consumer Welfare Fund on the following grounds:

(3.) The learned Advocate submitted that the refund of duty has been claimed with regard to the relevant Bills of Entry relating to the imported materials; that the Final Order dated 10.9.96 passed by the Tribunal mentions that "for Customs classification purposes, the goods have to be deemed to be 'cars' as a result of the legal fiction' but for the practical purposes, they remain components, assemblies or sub -assemblies" and M/s. Sepani Automobiles are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 72/93 -Cus.; that it is thus apparent that the Tribunal's Order is applicable to all the components imported by them; that accordingly, sanction of excess duty paid by them cannot be denied to them.