Kelvinator of India Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Kelvinator of India vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Aug 07, 2003

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/31821

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/31821
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: A T V.K.
Decided On: Aug 07, 2003
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kelvinator of India

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(157)ELT189TriDel

Excerpt

1. this is an application by m/s. kelvinator of india ltd. for waiver of pre-deposit of erroneous refund of rs. 6,02,673.40.2. shri p. jain, learned advocate, submitted that the appellate tribunal vide final order no. 581/98-c, dated 7-8-98 has allowed their appeal against the order passed by the commissioner (appeals) on the applicability of the principle of unjust enrichment following the decision of the bombay high court in the case of solar pesticides v.u.o.i - 1992 (57) e.l.t. 201; that no appeal was filed by the revenue against the tribunal's final order; that even then the refund has been denied to them on the ground that the bombay high court decision in solar pesticides has been set aside by the supreme court as reported in 2000 (116) e.l.t. 401 (s.c.). the learned advocate finally contended that once the order passed by the tribunal in their own case has attained the finality, the refund claim cannot be denied relying upon the decision in some other matter. i also heard shri h.c. verma, learned dr.3. the learned advocate has made out a strong prima facie case in favour of the applicants. i, therefore, stay the recovery of the entire amount demanded from them during the pendency of the appeal which is posted for final hearing on 22-9-2003.

Full Judgment

1. This is an application by M/s. Kelvinator of India Ltd. for waiver of pre-deposit of erroneous refund of Rs. 6,02,673.40.

2. Shri P. Jain, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellate Tribunal vide Final Order No. 581/98-C, dated 7-8-98 has allowed their appeal against the Order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the applicability of the principle of unjust enrichment following the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Solar Pesticides v.U.O.I - 1992 (57) E.L.T. 201; that no appeal was filed by the Revenue against the Tribunal's Final Order; that even then the refund has been denied to them on the ground that the Bombay High Court decision in Solar Pesticides has been set aside by the Supreme Court as reported in 2000 (116) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.). The learned Advocate finally contended that once the Order passed by the Tribunal in their own case has attained the finality, the refund claim cannot be denied relying upon the decision in some other matter. I also heard Shri H.C. Verma, learned DR.3. The learned Advocate has made out a strong prima facie case in favour of the applicants. I, therefore, stay the recovery of the entire amount demanded from them during the pendency of the appeal which is posted for final hearing on 22-9-2003.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Kelvinator of India vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge A T V.K.