https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105131 Retrospective operation of Section 11D and its effect on incentive notifications was not decided on merits; the Tribunal referred the question to the Allahabad High Court for determination whether Notifications Nos. 130/83-C.E. and 131/83-C.E. could continue despite the later statutory provision. Unjust enrichment was also left unresolved; the Tribunal referred the question whether Section 11D applies to Government incentive schemes permitting retention of the differential amount, particularly where duty had been collected from buyers and refunds were later claimed. Both issues were formally sent to the High Court for decision. en-us Fri, 10 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Mar 2012 16:16:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105131 Retrospective operation of Section 11D and its effect on incentive notifications was not decided on merits; the Tribunal referred the question to the Allahabad High Court for determination whether Notifications Nos. 130/83-C.E. and 131/83-C.E. could continue despite the later statutory provision. Unjust enrichment was also left unresolved; the Tribunal referred the question whether Section 11D applies to Government incentive schemes permitting retention of the differential amount, particularly where duty had been collected from buyers and refunds were later claimed. Both issues were formally sent to the High Court for decision. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105131