(1.) In this appeal filed against the impugned order -in -appeal dated 22 -10 -2003, the issue relates to the applicability of principle of unjust enrichment to the refund claim of the appellants.
(2.) The learned Counsel has contended that since duty was paid after the clearance of the goods when the annual capacity of production of the appellant's factory, was finally determined by the Commissioner, vide order dated 16 -4 -99. Therefore, the principle of unjust enrichment did not apply to their case.
(3.) On the other hand, the learned JDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order.