https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112808 The Revenue's challenge to a refund claim based on unjust enrichment was successful. The judge found errors in the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision, emphasizing the need to prove non-passing of duty to consumers. The case did not involve duty paid under protest, rendering the unjust enrichment principle inapplicable. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh decision focusing on the passing of duty element. The appeal of the Revenue was allowed, highlighting the importance of correctly applying legal principles in refund claims. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2012 18:14:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112808 The Revenue's challenge to a refund claim based on unjust enrichment was successful. The judge found errors in the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision, emphasizing the need to prove non-passing of duty to consumers. The case did not involve duty paid under protest, rendering the unjust enrichment principle inapplicable. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh decision focusing on the passing of duty element. The appeal of the Revenue was allowed, highlighting the importance of correctly applying legal principles in refund claims. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112808