https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249578 The appeal was allowed by the court, setting aside the decision that rejected the refund claim. The court found that unjust enrichment did not apply in this case, as the appellant had rectified the mistake in the purchase order promptly. It was established that the duty liability was not passed on to the ultimate customers, and the exemption of readymade garments from Central Excise duty was a significant factor. The court ruled in favor of the appellant, granting the appeal with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249578 The appeal was allowed by the court, setting aside the decision that rejected the refund claim. The court found that unjust enrichment did not apply in this case, as the appellant had rectified the mistake in the purchase order promptly. It was established that the duty liability was not passed on to the ultimate customers, and the exemption of readymade garments from Central Excise duty was a significant factor. The court ruled in favor of the appellant, granting the appeal with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249578