https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122121 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the denial of the refund claim on grounds of unjust enrichment. It concluded that the appellant, a government undertaking, passed on the Central Excise Duty to buyers, as evidenced by invoices and gate passes. The Tribunal rejected the argument that state undertakings are exempt from unjust enrichment, emphasizing that the Central Excise Act applies uniformly, irrespective of enterprise ownership. The sale of goods at a loss did not negate the passing on of excise duty, and the appellant's reliance on previous judgments was deemed inapplicable. The appeal was rejected, upholding the findings of the lower authorities. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Mar 2024 14:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122121 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the denial of the refund claim on grounds of unjust enrichment. It concluded that the appellant, a government undertaking, passed on the Central Excise Duty to buyers, as evidenced by invoices and gate passes. The Tribunal rejected the argument that state undertakings are exempt from unjust enrichment, emphasizing that the Central Excise Act applies uniformly, irrespective of enterprise ownership. The sale of goods at a loss did not negate the passing on of excise duty, and the appellant's reliance on previous judgments was deemed inapplicable. The appeal was rejected, upholding the findings of the lower authorities. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122121