https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254868 The appellant's refund claim for excess duty was initially rejected on appeal by the revenue due to lack of evidence of duty burden not being passed on to the buyer. The Adjudicating Authority, however, found evidence from a Chartered Accountant certificate and extracts from the company's books of accounts that the duty burden was not transferred to the buyer. The Authority set aside the rejection, concluding unjust enrichment did not apply in safeguard duty cases. The appellant's appeals were allowed, and consequential relief was granted. en-us Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jan 2015 15:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254868 The appellant's refund claim for excess duty was initially rejected on appeal by the revenue due to lack of evidence of duty burden not being passed on to the buyer. The Adjudicating Authority, however, found evidence from a Chartered Accountant certificate and extracts from the company's books of accounts that the duty burden was not transferred to the buyer. The Authority set aside the rejection, concluding unjust enrichment did not apply in safeguard duty cases. The appellant's appeals were allowed, and consequential relief was granted. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254868