https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251343 The High Court ruled in favor of the appellant in an appeal against the Tribunal's order on unjust enrichment in a tax appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court found that the Tribunal erred in setting aside the Commissioner's order, emphasizing the significance of evidence such as composite pricing in invoices and expert certificates in establishing the non-passing of duty burden to buyers. The appeal was allowed based on the evidence presented and legal precedent, highlighting the importance of thorough consideration of evidence and legal principles in resolving complex tax appeals involving unjust enrichment issues. en-us Tue, 07 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Sep 2014 08:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251343 The High Court ruled in favor of the appellant in an appeal against the Tribunal's order on unjust enrichment in a tax appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court found that the Tribunal erred in setting aside the Commissioner's order, emphasizing the significance of evidence such as composite pricing in invoices and expert certificates in establishing the non-passing of duty burden to buyers. The appeal was allowed based on the evidence presented and legal precedent, highlighting the importance of thorough consideration of evidence and legal principles in resolving complex tax appeals involving unjust enrichment issues. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251343