https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125633 The Tribunal held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply in cases of captive consumption where imported inputs are used in manufacturing and not sold. It emphasized that refund claims should be considered without the burden of unjust enrichment if duty has not been passed on directly. The Tribunal rejected the argument that more evidence was needed to prove non-passing on of duty incidence, stating that importers can demonstrate non-passing on of duty, especially in captive consumption cases, with sufficient evidence like invoices. The Tribunal upheld refund claims, emphasizing the importance of evidence in determining duty passing on in captive consumption scenarios. en-us Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Oct 2012 11:08:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125633 The Tribunal held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply in cases of captive consumption where imported inputs are used in manufacturing and not sold. It emphasized that refund claims should be considered without the burden of unjust enrichment if duty has not been passed on directly. The Tribunal rejected the argument that more evidence was needed to prove non-passing on of duty incidence, stating that importers can demonstrate non-passing on of duty, especially in captive consumption cases, with sufficient evidence like invoices. The Tribunal upheld refund claims, emphasizing the importance of evidence in determining duty passing on in captive consumption scenarios. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125633