https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108171 Refund limitation under excise law was computed from the date on which the annual production capacity was finally refixed, because duty had been paid under protest and the liability attained finality only on that later order. On that basis, the refund claims were held to be within time. The bar of unjust enrichment was also rejected because the records did not show separate recovery of duty from customers, and the assessee supported its claim with commercial invoices, an affidavit, a Chartered Accountant's certificate, and balance-sheet material showing that the duty had not been passed on. The refund order was set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Wed, 30 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Apr 2012 13:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108171 Refund limitation under excise law was computed from the date on which the annual production capacity was finally refixed, because duty had been paid under protest and the liability attained finality only on that later order. On that basis, the refund claims were held to be within time. The bar of unjust enrichment was also rejected because the records did not show separate recovery of duty from customers, and the assessee supported its claim with commercial invoices, an affidavit, a Chartered Accountant's certificate, and balance-sheet material showing that the duty had not been passed on. The refund order was set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108171