https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250830 The 10% restriction on credit for naphtha could not be applied mechanically where the entire duty incidence was borne by the assessee itself; on those facts, the full duty actually paid was creditable and the higher credit claim succeeded. The refund claim was also not barred by unjust enrichment because a Chartered Accountant's certificate showing that the duty burden had not been passed on to buyers was accepted in the absence of contrary evidence from the Revenue. The order rejecting refund was therefore set aside, with consequential credit relief. en-us Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jan 2015 14:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250830 The 10% restriction on credit for naphtha could not be applied mechanically where the entire duty incidence was borne by the assessee itself; on those facts, the full duty actually paid was creditable and the higher credit claim succeeded. The refund claim was also not barred by unjust enrichment because a Chartered Accountant's certificate showing that the duty burden had not been passed on to buyers was accepted in the absence of contrary evidence from the Revenue. The order rejecting refund was therefore set aside, with consequential credit relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250830