https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266426 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the doctrine of unjust enrichment was not applicable. The appellant paid the duty under protest, reflected it as receivable, and maintained consistent sale prices. The burden of proof that the duty was not passed on to customers was met with evidence, leading to the conclusion that unjust enrichment did not apply. The appeal was granted based on these findings and legal precedent, providing relief to the appellant. en-us Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 20:40:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266426 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the doctrine of unjust enrichment was not applicable. The appellant paid the duty under protest, reflected it as receivable, and maintained consistent sale prices. The burden of proof that the duty was not passed on to customers was met with evidence, leading to the conclusion that unjust enrichment did not apply. The appeal was granted based on these findings and legal precedent, providing relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266426