https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210228 The Tribunal set aside the decisions of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the original authority, remanding the case for reconsideration. The appellant, a manufacturer of paints, sought a refund of Service Tax paid as a recipient of service, arguing against unjust enrichment. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof was on the assessee to show they did not pass on the tax burden. The case was sent back for further examination on whether the appellants passed on the Service Tax credit to buyers, with the original authority directed to reassess the matter based on evidence provided by the appellants. en-us Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210228 The Tribunal set aside the decisions of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the original authority, remanding the case for reconsideration. The appellant, a manufacturer of paints, sought a refund of Service Tax paid as a recipient of service, arguing against unjust enrichment. The Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof was on the assessee to show they did not pass on the tax burden. The case was sent back for further examination on whether the appellants passed on the Service Tax credit to buyers, with the original authority directed to reassess the matter based on evidence provided by the appellants. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210228