https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249113 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim based on limitation. It ruled that unless the amount deposited is confirmed as duty, the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944 cannot be applied. The Tribunal also held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply when the amount deposited during investigation is not confirmed as duty. Consequently, the appellant was granted consequential relief based on legal principles and precedents, emphasizing that the amount deposited cannot be considered as duty unless confirmed as such. en-us Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Jun 2015 11:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249113 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim based on limitation. It ruled that unless the amount deposited is confirmed as duty, the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944 cannot be applied. The Tribunal also held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply when the amount deposited during investigation is not confirmed as duty. Consequently, the appellant was granted consequential relief based on legal principles and precedents, emphasizing that the amount deposited cannot be considered as duty unless confirmed as such. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249113