https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269351 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the refund denial based on unjust enrichment. The appellant provided a Chartered Accountant certificate and sales invoices as evidence to demonstrate that duty amounts were not collected from customers. The Tribunal found this evidence sufficient to shift the burden to the Revenue to prove unjust enrichment, criticizing the authorities for disregarding the evidence based on technicalities. The decision was influenced by the Tribunal's earlier ruling in favor of the appellant and the prolonged litigation process. en-us Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269351 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the refund denial based on unjust enrichment. The appellant provided a Chartered Accountant certificate and sales invoices as evidence to demonstrate that duty amounts were not collected from customers. The Tribunal found this evidence sufficient to shift the burden to the Revenue to prove unjust enrichment, criticizing the authorities for disregarding the evidence based on technicalities. The decision was influenced by the Tribunal's earlier ruling in favor of the appellant and the prolonged litigation process. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269351