TITLE- Doctrine of Unjust Enrichment will be applicable in case of refund of duty paid on

capital goods which are capitively consumed.

CASE NAME- Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai v. M/s Grasim Industries

CITATION- INSC 269 (13TH MARCH 2015)

COURT-

BENCH-

DECIDED ON- 13TH MARCH 2019

STATUTES-

CASE LAWS-

BRIEF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY-

1. Grasim Industries (Respondent) purchased Electro static precipitators (ESPs) from

BHEL, Ranipet.
2. Their was a notification dated 20.03.1990 no. 78/1990 CE, under which respondent
is entitled to buy the said ESPs at concessional rate of duty which was 5%.
3. There was a condition regarding the concessional rate of duty that the concessional
rate becomes payable only when officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary in
the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) certifies that te goods
manufactured are meant for pollution control purpose.
4. The dispute is regarding that respondent was entitled for concessional rate of duty
or not. He paid the duty at a normal rate which was 15% ad valo rem duty, so he
raised the contention of refund of money which was extra paid by them amounted
to Rs. 27,66,970.
5. The respondent(R) succeded in its first attempt before the Judicial Fora, but the
appellant refused to refund the money and rejected the application of (R) on ground
that the (R) had passed on the burden and therefore refunding the extra duty paid
would result in unjust enrichment to the (R).
6. Against this order, the (R) filed an appeal before the Commisiioner of Central Excise
(Appeal) Chennai, they also dismissed the appeal vide order dated 21.9.2000.
7. Then he filed appeal before CESTAT.