https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202155 The Member (J) ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the duty liability and allowing the refund claim of Rs. 9,12,773/- due to excess credit reversal. The decision was supported by arguments against unjust enrichment and denial of CENVAT credit on evaporation losses, with reference to specific case law. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any. en-us Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Feb 2011 10:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202155 The Member (J) ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the duty liability and allowing the refund claim of Rs. 9,12,773/- due to excess credit reversal. The decision was supported by arguments against unjust enrichment and denial of CENVAT credit on evaporation losses, with reference to specific case law. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202155