https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124385 The Supreme Court allowed the appellant's appeal against the rejection of a refund claim amounting to Rs. 26,28,773/-, stemming from the import of goods in 1996. The Tribunal's decision to demand Rs. 42,11,864/- and impose a penalty was overturned by the Supreme Court. Subsequently, the appellant filed a refund claim, which was initially credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund for failure to demonstrate that the duty burden had not been passed on. However, based on evidence provided, including continuous accounting treatment and a Chartered Accountant's certificate, the Tribunal allowed the refund claim, finding that the duty burden had not been transferred to buyers. en-us Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:58:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124385 The Supreme Court allowed the appellant's appeal against the rejection of a refund claim amounting to Rs. 26,28,773/-, stemming from the import of goods in 1996. The Tribunal's decision to demand Rs. 42,11,864/- and impose a penalty was overturned by the Supreme Court. Subsequently, the appellant filed a refund claim, which was initially credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund for failure to demonstrate that the duty burden had not been passed on. However, based on evidence provided, including continuous accounting treatment and a Chartered Accountant's certificate, the Tribunal allowed the refund claim, finding that the duty burden had not been transferred to buyers. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124385