https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92827 Refund of handloom cess was held inadmissible because the claimants did not prove that the same cess had been paid twice on the same goods. The Tribunal applied the principle that, in a refund proceeding, the burden lies on the claimant to establish double payment with evidence; a bare assertion is insufficient. As the appellants failed to substantiate that unprocessed cotton fabrics had already borne cess for the identical quantity claimed, the rejection of refund was upheld and the issue was decided against the assessee. en-us Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Nov 2011 13:17:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92827 Refund of handloom cess was held inadmissible because the claimants did not prove that the same cess had been paid twice on the same goods. The Tribunal applied the principle that, in a refund proceeding, the burden lies on the claimant to establish double payment with evidence; a bare assertion is insufficient. As the appellants failed to substantiate that unprocessed cotton fabrics had already borne cess for the identical quantity claimed, the rejection of refund was upheld and the issue was decided against the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92827