https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96060 The Tribunal held that both Notification Nos. 24/65-C.E. and 259/83-C.E. could be availed simultaneously for "Vegetable Product" subject to conditions. Refund claims were rejected based on unjust enrichment without allowing appellants to rebut post personal hearing, violating natural justice principles. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of granting a fair opportunity for appellants to present their case and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. The issue of applying the unjust enrichment clause to refund claims filed before Section 11B amendment was not conclusively addressed, but the appeal was allowed for a fair personal hearing. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:39:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96060 The Tribunal held that both Notification Nos. 24/65-C.E. and 259/83-C.E. could be availed simultaneously for "Vegetable Product" subject to conditions. Refund claims were rejected based on unjust enrichment without allowing appellants to rebut post personal hearing, violating natural justice principles. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of granting a fair opportunity for appellants to present their case and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. The issue of applying the unjust enrichment clause to refund claims filed before Section 11B amendment was not conclusively addressed, but the appeal was allowed for a fair personal hearing. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96060