https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112929 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and allowing the respondents' refund claim. The Tribunal found that the doctrine of unjust enrichment was inapplicable as the respondents had redeposited the refund amount under protest and accounted for it in their balance sheet, demonstrating that the duty incidence had not passed to buyers. Therefore, the respondents were entitled to the refund under Notification 198/76-C.E., and the Department's attempt to disallow the claim based on unjust enrichment was rejected. en-us Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 May 2012 16:38:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112929 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and allowing the respondents' refund claim. The Tribunal found that the doctrine of unjust enrichment was inapplicable as the respondents had redeposited the refund amount under protest and accounted for it in their balance sheet, demonstrating that the duty incidence had not passed to buyers. Therefore, the respondents were entitled to the refund under Notification 198/76-C.E., and the Department's attempt to disallow the claim based on unjust enrichment was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112929