Order Date – 15 February 2023

Parties: M/s D.D. International Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi

Facts – 

• The Appellant, M/s D.D. International Pvt Ltd, imported rice polisher machine with spare parts and colour sorter machine, during March 2012 to August 2013. By using the Agri Infrastructure Incentives Scrips the Appellant saved duty of Rs. 10,78,050/-
• A show cause notice dated 09.03.2017 was issued alleging that the machinery goods were not qualified for import under the subject scrips. The duty and penalty confirmed was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
• The refund application filed by the appellant was allowed but the Appellant have not satisfied as to the bar of unjust enrichment. Appellant have been unable to prove that the duty burden has not been passed on by them. Thus, amount was credited to Consumer Welfare Fund.

Issue –

• Whether the sanctioned amount of refund has been rightly credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund?

Order –

• The Tribunal relied on the ruling of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Suvidhe Ltd. 1997 (94) E.L.T. A159 (S.C.) wherein it was held that unjust enrichment is not attracted where amount is deposited during investigation and pendency of appeal, as such deposits are under protest or in the nature of pre-deposit.
• Hence, it was held that the burden of unjust enrichment is not attracted. 
• The Adjudicating Authority is directed to grant the refund with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of deposit till the date of refund.