https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211191 An amount paid under protest during investigation and never appropriated as duty retains the character of a deposit, so the refund mechanism under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 does not apply and the claim cannot be rejected as time-barred on that basis. The doctrine of unjust enrichment also does not bar refund where the evidence shows that the incidence was not passed on, including reversal of credit by the recipient units and supporting departmental and balance sheet material. The refund was therefore held admissible, and the rejection was set aside with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 10 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Mar 2012 16:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211191 An amount paid under protest during investigation and never appropriated as duty retains the character of a deposit, so the refund mechanism under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 does not apply and the claim cannot be rejected as time-barred on that basis. The doctrine of unjust enrichment also does not bar refund where the evidence shows that the incidence was not passed on, including reversal of credit by the recipient units and supporting departmental and balance sheet material. The refund was therefore held admissible, and the rejection was set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211191