https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110230 A refund claim arising from abatement on damaged imported goods was treated as a claim for excess duty paid after assessment and clearance, so Section 27 of the Customs Act governed the refund. The amended refund regime applied to all claims not finally and unconditionally refunded before the amendment came into force, and the pending claim therefore attracted the bar of unjust enrichment. The claimant was required to prove that the duty incidence had not been passed on, but the loss figures and chartered accountant's certificate were found insufficient. The refund was accordingly rejected and the denial of restitution sustained. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:41:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110230 A refund claim arising from abatement on damaged imported goods was treated as a claim for excess duty paid after assessment and clearance, so Section 27 of the Customs Act governed the refund. The amended refund regime applied to all claims not finally and unconditionally refunded before the amendment came into force, and the pending claim therefore attracted the bar of unjust enrichment. The claimant was required to prove that the duty incidence had not been passed on, but the loss figures and chartered accountant's certificate were found insufficient. The refund was accordingly rejected and the denial of restitution sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110230