https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255527 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, rejecting the refund claim based on unjust enrichment and procedural violations. The Commissioner (Appeals) was deemed to have erred in not thoroughly assessing the substantive benefit apart from procedural issues. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's evidence showing that the burden had been passed on to customers, making the Chartered Accountant's certificate insufficient to counter it. Consequently, the original adjudicating authority's decision on unjust enrichment was upheld, and the refund claim was rejected. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Sep 2015 16:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255527 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, rejecting the refund claim based on unjust enrichment and procedural violations. The Commissioner (Appeals) was deemed to have erred in not thoroughly assessing the substantive benefit apart from procedural issues. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's evidence showing that the burden had been passed on to customers, making the Chartered Accountant's certificate insufficient to counter it. Consequently, the original adjudicating authority's decision on unjust enrichment was upheld, and the refund claim was rejected. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255527