https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266534 The Tribunal rejected the appellant's refund claim on the processing of Wood Timber, determining that it did not amount to manufacture. A partial refund was sanctioned, with the remaining amount directed to be credited to the Fund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944. The rejection of the balance refund was upheld due to the appellant's failure to prove that the duty burden was not passed on to customers. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the assessee and the absence of exemptions for state government authorities from unjust enrichment principles. The appeal was dismissed, underscoring the need for evidence to support refund claims and adherence to unjust enrichment principles. en-us Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266534 The Tribunal rejected the appellant's refund claim on the processing of Wood Timber, determining that it did not amount to manufacture. A partial refund was sanctioned, with the remaining amount directed to be credited to the Fund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act 1944. The rejection of the balance refund was upheld due to the appellant's failure to prove that the duty burden was not passed on to customers. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the assessee and the absence of exemptions for state government authorities from unjust enrichment principles. The appeal was dismissed, underscoring the need for evidence to support refund claims and adherence to unjust enrichment principles. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266534