https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267224 Classification of Tyre Scanner K2 type separation and Tread Porosity System and Software for Scanner K2 was accepted under Chapter Heading 90.27, with no error found in the Tribunal's view. The refund claim, however, required examination of unjust enrichment before relief could be granted, and the matter was remitted for fresh determination on whether the duty burden had been passed on to the consumer. The refund decision was to be taken in line with the principle applied in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III v. Grasim Industries. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jan 2016 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267224 Classification of Tyre Scanner K2 type separation and Tread Porosity System and Software for Scanner K2 was accepted under Chapter Heading 90.27, with no error found in the Tribunal's view. The refund claim, however, required examination of unjust enrichment before relief could be granted, and the matter was remitted for fresh determination on whether the duty burden had been passed on to the consumer. The refund decision was to be taken in line with the principle applied in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III v. Grasim Industries. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267224