1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appeal denied: Claimant failed to shift duty burden, refund directed to consumer welfare fund.</h1> The appeal was rejected as the claimant failed to prove the non-passing of duty burden to buyers, resulting in the refund being directed to the consumer ... Appellants have claimed depreciation on the imported goods, on the full cost including duty paid amount, Their plea that this doesn’t have any effect on their final product, hence the duty burden wasn’t passed on by them to their customers’, can’t be accepted. Since the appellants haven’t clearly established that they have not passed on the incidence of duty on the imported goods to their customers, the bar of unjust enrichment operates against them – refund claim rejected The claim for refund of Rs.6,78,433/- has been sanctioned but directed to consumer welfare fund due to failure to prove non-passing of duty burden to buyers. Appeal rejected as unjust enrichment bar applies.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
