https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210643 Refund under Section 11B was denied because the claimant failed to establish proper correlation between factory clearances and depot/consignment agent invoices, and the records did not satisfactorily show that the duty burden had not been passed on. The mismatch in invoice addresses, together with the absence of serial numbers or other identifying particulars on the depot invoices, led the Tribunal to treat the issue as one of factual proof rather than legal error. No substantial question of law arose from that factual finding, and the rejection of the refund claim was sustained. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210643 Refund under Section 11B was denied because the claimant failed to establish proper correlation between factory clearances and depot/consignment agent invoices, and the records did not satisfactorily show that the duty burden had not been passed on. The mismatch in invoice addresses, together with the absence of serial numbers or other identifying particulars on the depot invoices, led the Tribunal to treat the issue as one of factual proof rather than legal error. No substantial question of law arose from that factual finding, and the rejection of the refund claim was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210643