Unjust enrichment in excise refund claims required fresh scrutiny where passing on of duty incidence was not conclusively shown.

A claim for central excise duty refund on paper waste and plastic scrap turned on whether the duty incidence had been passed on to customers. The appellate authority noted the assessee's contention that the burden was absorbed by lowering profit margins and that the wholesale price did not rise after duty became payable, but it also found no ative showing that the pre-duty and post-duty wholesale prices were the same. On the available record, the issue could not be conclusively determined, so the matter was remanded for fresh examination of unjust enrichment.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee had established that the incidence of central excise duty on paper waste and plastic scrap had not been passed on to customers.

Analysis: The appellate authority noted the assessee's claim that the duty burden was absorbed by reducing profit margin and that the wholesale price did not increase after duty became payable. It also found that the assessee had not shown that the wholesale price before payment of duty was the same as thereafter, so the question could not be finally determined on the available record.

Outcome: The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration of whether the duty incidence had been passed on.

---