https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234315 The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision that the appellant failed to refute the presumption of unjust enrichment. The appellant's argument that as a government undertaking, unjust enrichment should not apply was rejected. The court found that the appellant did not provide sufficient documentary evidence to prove that the duty burden was not passed on to consumers. The appeal was dismissed without costs, and the lower authorities' findings were upheld. en-us Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Jun 2013 09:01:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234315 The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision that the appellant failed to refute the presumption of unjust enrichment. The appellant's argument that as a government undertaking, unjust enrichment should not apply was rejected. The court found that the appellant did not provide sufficient documentary evidence to prove that the duty burden was not passed on to consumers. The appeal was dismissed without costs, and the lower authorities' findings were upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234315