https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212866 Refund of excise duty was held payable because the department failed to prove that the duty incidence had been passed on to buyers. The earlier record showed the duty element in the relevant gate passes and invoices as nil, and the later claim that the invoice price included duty was unsupported. The respondents also could not produce the original gate passes despite being called upon to do so, and their material did not displace the petitioner's evidence that it had borne the duty burden. The statutory bar against refund on unjust enrichment was therefore not established, and refund with interest followed. en-us Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212866 Refund of excise duty was held payable because the department failed to prove that the duty incidence had been passed on to buyers. The earlier record showed the duty element in the relevant gate passes and invoices as nil, and the later claim that the invoice price included duty was unsupported. The respondents also could not produce the original gate passes despite being called upon to do so, and their material did not displace the petitioner's evidence that it had borne the duty burden. The statutory bar against refund on unjust enrichment was therefore not established, and refund with interest followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212866