https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94088 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for further examination of the unjust enrichment aspect, emphasizing the necessity of providing the appellants with a fair opportunity to present their case. The refund claim of Central Excise Duty was deemed sustainable in law due to the absence of evidence of manufacturing activity on the imported goods before clearance. The Department failed to prove manufacturing activity, shifting the onus to them, and the case was remanded for a detailed assessment of unjust enrichment before final decision. en-us Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Nov 2011 10:47:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94088 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for further examination of the unjust enrichment aspect, emphasizing the necessity of providing the appellants with a fair opportunity to present their case. The refund claim of Central Excise Duty was deemed sustainable in law due to the absence of evidence of manufacturing activity on the imported goods before clearance. The Department failed to prove manufacturing activity, shifting the onus to them, and the case was remanded for a detailed assessment of unjust enrichment before final decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94088