https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88111 The judgment upheld the decision of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, denying the refund claim under the unjust enrichment clause of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The appellant failed to prove that the burden of Central Excise duty had not been passed on to the buyers, as evidenced by gate passes indicating duty paid, invoices showing total prices inclusive of taxes, and lack of specific details in the Chartered Accountant's certificate. The court relied on the presumption that duty is passed on to consumers unless proven otherwise, ultimately dismissing the appeals due to the appellant's inability to demonstrate non-passing of the duty burden to buyers. en-us Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 11:21:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88111 The judgment upheld the decision of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, denying the refund claim under the unjust enrichment clause of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The appellant failed to prove that the burden of Central Excise duty had not been passed on to the buyers, as evidenced by gate passes indicating duty paid, invoices showing total prices inclusive of taxes, and lack of specific details in the Chartered Accountant's certificate. The court relied on the presumption that duty is passed on to consumers unless proven otherwise, ultimately dismissing the appeals due to the appellant's inability to demonstrate non-passing of the duty burden to buyers. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88111