https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105573 A refund claim for differential central excise duty paid under protest remained subject to Section 11B, because the matter arose from reclassification and not provisional assessment. The assessee had to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 12B by proving that the duty burden was not passed on to buyers. Affidavits, cost sheets, invoices, price stability and related documents were found insufficient to establish that the incidence was borne by the assessee. The amended refund provisions therefore applied, unjust enrichment barred the claim, and the refundable amount was directed to the Consumer Welfare Fund. en-us Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Mar 2012 12:48:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105573 A refund claim for differential central excise duty paid under protest remained subject to Section 11B, because the matter arose from reclassification and not provisional assessment. The assessee had to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 12B by proving that the duty burden was not passed on to buyers. Affidavits, cost sheets, invoices, price stability and related documents were found insufficient to establish that the incidence was borne by the assessee. The amended refund provisions therefore applied, unjust enrichment barred the claim, and the refundable amount was directed to the Consumer Welfare Fund. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105573