https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118930 The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-original and allowed the appeal, emphasizing that unjust enrichment provisions cannot be applied retrospectively to refunds made finally and unconditionally before the enactment of such provisions. The refund granted in 1990, prior to the enactment of unjust enrichment provisions in 1991, could not be recovered based on unjust enrichment. The decision underscored the significance of the timing of refund grants in relation to the application of unjust enrichment provisions and the retrospective nature of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the Mafatlal Industries Case. en-us Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jul 2012 17:27:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118930 The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-original and allowed the appeal, emphasizing that unjust enrichment provisions cannot be applied retrospectively to refunds made finally and unconditionally before the enactment of such provisions. The refund granted in 1990, prior to the enactment of unjust enrichment provisions in 1991, could not be recovered based on unjust enrichment. The decision underscored the significance of the timing of refund grants in relation to the application of unjust enrichment provisions and the retrospective nature of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the Mafatlal Industries Case. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118930