https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122640 Refund of differential excise duty paid after clearance of goods was held not to be barred by unjust enrichment where the evidence showed the duty incidence could not have been passed on to buyers after clearance. The presumption under section 12B was displaced because payment was made later and no debit note or invoice recovery was effected. The same principle was applied to the interest component, which was also treated as outside the refund bar. The Revenue's objection was therefore rejected. en-us Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Nov 2017 11:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122640 Refund of differential excise duty paid after clearance of goods was held not to be barred by unjust enrichment where the evidence showed the duty incidence could not have been passed on to buyers after clearance. The presumption under section 12B was displaced because payment was made later and no debit note or invoice recovery was effected. The same principle was applied to the interest component, which was also treated as outside the refund bar. The Revenue's objection was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 05 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122640