https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109070 The appellant's refund claim of duty on imported fabric was initially rejected on grounds of unjust enrichment. The appellant argued that they did not pass on the duty element to customers and sold the material below the landed cost inclusive of the higher duty paid. The judge found merit in the appellant's explanation, highlighting the need to compare the landed cost with the sale value to ascertain if duty was realized from customers. As the Revenue failed to conduct this analysis, the matter was remanded for further assessment, resulting in the appeal being allowed by way of remand. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 17:18:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109070 The appellant's refund claim of duty on imported fabric was initially rejected on grounds of unjust enrichment. The appellant argued that they did not pass on the duty element to customers and sold the material below the landed cost inclusive of the higher duty paid. The judge found merit in the appellant's explanation, highlighting the need to compare the landed cost with the sale value to ascertain if duty was realized from customers. As the Revenue failed to conduct this analysis, the matter was remanded for further assessment, resulting in the appeal being allowed by way of remand. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109070