https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126265 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai dismissed the appeal against the rejection of a refund claim under the Central Excise Act. The appellants failed to prove that the duty incidence had not been passed on to another person as required by Section 11B(1). The Tribunal emphasized the claimant's burden of proof in establishing non-passing on of duty incidence and relied on the Supreme Court's decision in CCE, Mumbai v. Allied Photographics India Ltd. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the importance of statutory provisions and legal precedents in refund claims related to duty incidence. en-us Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Nov 2012 10:18:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126265 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai dismissed the appeal against the rejection of a refund claim under the Central Excise Act. The appellants failed to prove that the duty incidence had not been passed on to another person as required by Section 11B(1). The Tribunal emphasized the claimant's burden of proof in establishing non-passing on of duty incidence and relied on the Supreme Court's decision in CCE, Mumbai v. Allied Photographics India Ltd. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the importance of statutory provisions and legal precedents in refund claims related to duty incidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126265