https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219340 The appellants were denied a refund of extra duty paid due to unjust enrichment. The judge found that despite a consistent output price, the duty burden was passed on to customers through product pricing. The Chartered Accountant's Certificate only addressed accounting treatment, not the non-passing of duty. The duty was recorded as expenditure, not as receivables, indicating inclusion in product pricing. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the judge upheld the lower appellate authority's decision, concluding that the duty burden was absorbed in output cost and passed on in goods pricing. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219340 The appellants were denied a refund of extra duty paid due to unjust enrichment. The judge found that despite a consistent output price, the duty burden was passed on to customers through product pricing. The Chartered Accountant's Certificate only addressed accounting treatment, not the non-passing of duty. The duty was recorded as expenditure, not as receivables, indicating inclusion in product pricing. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the judge upheld the lower appellate authority's decision, concluding that the duty burden was absorbed in output cost and passed on in goods pricing. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219340