https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84326 Payment of excise duty under protest under Rule 233B preserves the assessee's right to dispute liability, but it is not equivalent to provisional assessment under Rule 9B; a claim for repayment of duty already paid therefore falls within Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The argument that such refund lay outside Section 11B was rejected. On unjust enrichment, the record before the Tribunal was incomplete on price lists, invoices, discounts, actual realisation, balance sheet entries and profit and loss material, so the question whether the duty burden had been passed on to buyers required fresh examination. The refund dispute was remitted for reconsideration after review of the supporting evidence and hearing the parties. en-us Mon, 24 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jul 2011 12:29:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84326 Payment of excise duty under protest under Rule 233B preserves the assessee's right to dispute liability, but it is not equivalent to provisional assessment under Rule 9B; a claim for repayment of duty already paid therefore falls within Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The argument that such refund lay outside Section 11B was rejected. On unjust enrichment, the record before the Tribunal was incomplete on price lists, invoices, discounts, actual realisation, balance sheet entries and profit and loss material, so the question whether the duty burden had been passed on to buyers required fresh examination. The refund dispute was remitted for reconsideration after review of the supporting evidence and hearing the parties. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84326