https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118727 The Appellant contended they could not take credit on excess payment detected before return submission. The Commissioner allowed the refund, but the Appellant disagreed, citing Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Bhopal. The Respondent argued the duty incident wasn't passed on, supported by Shyam Textile Mills & Anr. v. Union of India and SICPA India Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur. The Appellant's unauthorized credit led to excess duty payment, invoking 'unjust enrichment' per Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Bhopal. The Revenue's appeal was allowed, setting aside the previous order. en-us Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 13:23:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118727 The Appellant contended they could not take credit on excess payment detected before return submission. The Commissioner allowed the refund, but the Appellant disagreed, citing Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Bhopal. The Respondent argued the duty incident wasn't passed on, supported by Shyam Textile Mills & Anr. v. Union of India and SICPA India Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur. The Appellant's unauthorized credit led to excess duty payment, invoking 'unjust enrichment' per Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Bhopal. The Revenue's appeal was allowed, setting aside the previous order. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118727