Order Date – 20 February 2023

Parties: Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry Commissionerate Vs M/s. Deepak Cables India Ltd.

Facts –

• The Respondent, M/s. Deepak Cables India Ltd., had filed a refund claim along with a Chartered Accountant Certificate on 26.10.2009 and on 12.01.2012 towards downward price revision based on the negative supplementary invoices raised to M/s. Power Grid Corporation India Limited (M/s. PGCL).
• Show Cause Notices issued to the assessee proposing to reject the refund claim, on the ground of unjust enrichment. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee for the refund claim filed on 26.10.2009 holding that the assessee is eligible for refund and set aside Order of the original authority both on merits as well as on the ground of unjust enrichment.
• Being aggrieved both the department and the assessee has filed the appeals.

Issue –

• Whether the refund claim filed by the assessee is hit by the principle of doctrine of unjust enrichment?

Order –

• The Tribunal held that the excess payment initially made by M/s. PGCL would stand adjusted against the final amount payable by M/s. PGCL. Thus, the excess payment was borne by the assessee. The assessee has furnished the supplementary invoices for the downward price variation with regard to both refund claims. It is not disputed that there has been excess payment of duty due to the downward price revision.
• In the case of CCE, Coimbatore Vs. Flow Tech Power reported in 2006 (202) ELT 404 (Mad.), the Hon’ble High Court of Madras had held that when the assessee has submitted the Chartered Accountant certificate to prove that the duty has not been passed on to their customers, the refund is not hit by unjust enrichment.
• Hence the assessee is eligible for refund on merits as well having satisfied the test of unjust enrichment. The appeal filed by the department is dismissed.