https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85214 The amended Section 11B was treated as retrospectively operative and applicable to pending refund matters, including under Section 11B(3) as amended, so refund eligibility had to be examined in light of the updated law. The objection of unjust enrichment therefore remained relevant, and refund could not be granted without considering whether the duty burden had been passed on. However, because the appellants said that this objection had not been specifically raised and sought an opportunity to prove otherwise, the matter was remanded to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration and evidence on passing on of duty. en-us Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:45:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85214 The amended Section 11B was treated as retrospectively operative and applicable to pending refund matters, including under Section 11B(3) as amended, so refund eligibility had to be examined in light of the updated law. The objection of unjust enrichment therefore remained relevant, and refund could not be granted without considering whether the duty burden had been passed on. However, because the appellants said that this objection had not been specifically raised and sought an opportunity to prove otherwise, the matter was remanded to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for fresh consideration and evidence on passing on of duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85214