https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117532 The appeal was not time-barred as it was filed within the prescribed period. The duty demand was dropped, and the appellants, who paid the duty on behalf of the job worker, were entitled to a refund as they did not pass on the extra duty amount to customers. The refund claim was not affected by unjust enrichment as the payment was made under protest and not passed on to customers. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai. en-us Fri, 17 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:46:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117532 The appeal was not time-barred as it was filed within the prescribed period. The duty demand was dropped, and the appellants, who paid the duty on behalf of the job worker, were entitled to a refund as they did not pass on the extra duty amount to customers. The refund claim was not affected by unjust enrichment as the payment was made under protest and not passed on to customers. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117532