Case Law Research

CESTAT Ahmedabad : Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar Vs. The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd : 16th March, 2017 Featured

In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad

Appeal No : C/26/2010
(Arising out of OIA-134/COMMR-A-/JMN/2009 dated 18/11/2009 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) of Customs, Jamnagar)

Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar
Appellant (s)


The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd
Respondent (s)

Represented by:
For Appellant (s) : Shri A. Mishra, Authorised Representative
For Respondent (s): None

Dr. D. M. Misra, Hon'ble Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing/Decision: 16.03.2017

ORDER NO. A/10631 / 2017 dated 16.03.2017

Per : Dr. D. M. Misra

None present for the Respondent. Heard the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Revenue.

2. This is an appeal filed against OIA No. 134/COMMR-A-/JMN/2009 dated 18/11/2009 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) of Customs, Jamnagar. The Revenue has come in appeal on the ground that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has held that the principle of unjust enrichment would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. He has observed that the refund in the instant case arose on the final assessment of the Bill of entry on 31.03.2005, which was earlier provisionally assessed and the provisions for applying the principle of unjust enrichment on finalization of assessment has been incorporated under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 w.e.f. 13.07.2006. In recording said observation, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) referred to the judgements of the Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs. M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. 2008 (231) ELT 36 (Guj.) and the decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. [2009 (235) ELT 629 (Tri.-LB).

3. No contrary decision has been placed by the Ld. AR for the Revenue. He submits that appeal against M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd.s case has been filed before the Honble Supreme Court, however, no stay has been granted by the Apex Court.

4. I find that the issue is covered by the judgement of Honble Gujarat High Court in M/s Hindalco Industries Ltds case (supra). Moreover, I find that after filing the appeal, the Revenue has approached the Committee on Disputes (COD), as was necessary at the relevant point of time, for clearance to litigate it before this forum. However, the Committee on Disputes (COD) has not permitted the Revenue to continue with the litigation before this Tribunal. Considering all of the aforesaid circumstances, I do not find any reason to interferer with the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, the Revenues appeal, is dismissed.

(Dictated and pronounced in the Court)

(D. M. Misra)
Member (Judicial)


Last modified on Wednesday, 22 March 2017 08:13

Additional Info

  • Date Range: Thursday, 16 March 2017
  • Court/Authority: CESTAT
  • Tax Type: Customs duty
  • Petitioner/Appellant: Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar Vs. The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd
  • Respondent: Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar Vs. The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd
  • Appl no. or Appl year: Appeal No : C/26/2010
  • Supreme Court Location: Delhi
  • CESTAT Location: Ahmedabad
  • AAR Location: Delhi
  • Authority: Supreme Court

A New Feature :

Advanced Case Law Search


7th April, 2016

The “Advanced Case Law Search” feature in TaxQuotient  enables search on separate parameters such as Court, Tax Type, Date (from & to Range), appellant, respondent and even keywords. This helps you in locating case law you are searching for swiftly.

TIP: #1 : If you want to view the latest cases, just enter the start and end dates keeping all other boxes blank. You will get a list of all available indirect tax cases during that period.

TIP # 2 : Please keep the date range (start to end date) for upto 6 months.

TIP # 3 : Don't forget to reset the search to clear the earlier results before a new search.

Click to enter Advanced Case Law Search

 GST Bill passed by Parliament




The 122nd Constitution Amendment Bill introduced in Parliament in December 2014 has been passed by the Rajya Sabha and now also by the Lok Sabha with the amendments.  Now the Bill must get ratified by at least half the number of 31 State Legislatures which means 16 States and then finally get the approval from the President.

Thereafter the GST Council has to be set up which will determine the GST design at the granular level. This will include the structure of GST including scope of CGST, SGST and IGST, the taxes subsumed, the items/commodities covered and other critical aspects such as the threshold limits for taxability, exemptions, and several other parameters critical for an ideal  GST.

Further, for the GST to operate smoothly, the taxes paid on goods and services at every stage in the value chain needs to be tracked. This requires an IT infrastructure which will track the transactions and taxes paid and form the back-bone of GST. Reportedly considerable work has been already done on it, nevertheless it will need changes to correctly reflect the GST Law proposed by the GST Council and accepted by the Central & State Legislatures.

Last but not the least,  the tax authorities and other stakeholders who will implement the GST need to be trained for a smooth introduction.

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 


If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

CESTAT Updates

June- July 2016


Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes


  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues
Go to top