https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124125 The Judge overturned the Commissioner's decision to deny a refund claim based on unjust enrichment. The appellants successfully demonstrated through evidence, including balance sheets and a Chartered Accountant's certificate, that the duty incidence was not passed on. The Judge found the evidence provided by the appellants satisfactory, noting that the deposits were clearly marked as receivable and not part of expenses. The Commissioner's rejection was criticized for lacking specificity in demanding additional evidence. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and consequential relief was granted to the appellants. en-us Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Sep 2017 12:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124125 The Judge overturned the Commissioner's decision to deny a refund claim based on unjust enrichment. The appellants successfully demonstrated through evidence, including balance sheets and a Chartered Accountant's certificate, that the duty incidence was not passed on. The Judge found the evidence provided by the appellants satisfactory, noting that the deposits were clearly marked as receivable and not part of expenses. The Commissioner's rejection was criticized for lacking specificity in demanding additional evidence. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and consequential relief was granted to the appellants. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124125