https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110293 The Tribunal upheld the decision to deposit the refund claim in the Consumer Welfare Fund, as the appellants failed to prove non-passing of duty incidence to the consumer. The rejection of balance sheet entries as evidence, the applicability of the doctrine of unjust enrichment, and the lack of merit in the appeal led to its dismissal. The appellants' inability to provide substantial evidence and legal basis for their case resulted in the Tribunal's ruling against them. en-us Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:40:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110293 The Tribunal upheld the decision to deposit the refund claim in the Consumer Welfare Fund, as the appellants failed to prove non-passing of duty incidence to the consumer. The rejection of balance sheet entries as evidence, the applicability of the doctrine of unjust enrichment, and the lack of merit in the appeal led to its dismissal. The appellants' inability to provide substantial evidence and legal basis for their case resulted in the Tribunal's ruling against them. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110293