https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90207 Excise duty refund was held not to be barred by unjust enrichment where contemporaneous invoices separately showed the duty element, buyers issued debit notes for that duty, and ledger entries reflected the amount as still outstanding from the customers. On that material, the presumption that the duty incidence had been passed on was rebutted, so the refund could not be denied. The prior Revenue authority cited was distinguished because the record here showed that the burden had not been shifted to buyers at the time of clearance. en-us Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Oct 2011 13:23:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90207 Excise duty refund was held not to be barred by unjust enrichment where contemporaneous invoices separately showed the duty element, buyers issued debit notes for that duty, and ledger entries reflected the amount as still outstanding from the customers. On that material, the presumption that the duty incidence had been passed on was rebutted, so the refund could not be denied. The prior Revenue authority cited was distinguished because the record here showed that the burden had not been shifted to buyers at the time of clearance. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90207