Held - The petitioner claims that the said amount was paid under protest, though there is no documentary evidence produced by the petitioner before this Court to show that the same was paid under protest. Even assuming that the petitioner's statement that the said amount was paid under protest is to be accepted by this Court, even otherwise, the petitioner is not entitled for refund, as any refund claim will also be barred by limitation. When .....

Held - Admittedly, the amount under refund claim were deposited partly during investigation and partly during pendency of the 1st appeal. Further, it is evident that the Appellant did not agree with revenue and have contested the SCN as well as the adjudication order. The amount deposited are found to be deposited under protest, ipso facto. Further, these amounts are also in the nature of pre-deposit. Accordingly, I hold that the burden of unj.....

Held - It is, therefore, clear from the aforesaid decisions of the High Courts and the Tribunal that any amount deposited during the pendency of adjudication or investigation is in the nature of a deposit and, therefore, cannot be considered to be towards payment of service tax or excise duty. The principles of unjust enrichment, therefore, would not apply if a refund is claimed for refund of this amount.

In view of the aforesaid discuss.....

Held - It is difficult for this Court to accept that the payment of custom duty imposed pursuant to an order while appealing the same can be construed as payment of duty without protest. The very act of filing an appeal against an order imposing customs duty is a protest against the duty as assessed. The entire purpose of such an appeal is to seek reduction of the levy. It is, thus, obvious that the assessee does not accept the said levy and, .....

Held - Having considered the rival contentions, I find that learned Commissioner (Appeals) have rightly held that the amount remained with the revenue unadjusted by way of pre-deposit. I further find under the facts and circumstances, that such pre-deposit was made under protest which is writ large on the face of the record. I further find there is no merits on the grounds of appeal raised by revenue. Relying on the ruling of the Division Benc.....

Held - I find that there is no dispute that the department has collected Rs. 9 Lakhs even though the adjudication process was undergoing. The amount of demand can be recovered only after the same is determined by completing the adjudication process, therefore, before the adjudication process, the amount of tax cannot be recovered. In this case since the amount was recovered which was otherwise not recoverable at the material time. The appellan.....