https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2590 A sum paid under Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 for job-worked clearances was treated as a reversal or adjustment of credit relating to common inputs, not as central excise duty. On that basis, job-worked goods cleared to the principal manufacturer were not treated as exempted goods for Rule 6(3)(b), and the refund was not governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The doctrine of unjust enrichment also did not apply where the amount was not recovered from buyers or the principal manufacturer. The impugned refund rejection was therefore not sustainable, and refund with interest was held admissible. en-us Wed, 19 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2590 A sum paid under Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 for job-worked clearances was treated as a reversal or adjustment of credit relating to common inputs, not as central excise duty. On that basis, job-worked goods cleared to the principal manufacturer were not treated as exempted goods for Rule 6(3)(b), and the refund was not governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The doctrine of unjust enrichment also did not apply where the amount was not recovered from buyers or the principal manufacturer. The impugned refund rejection was therefore not sustainable, and refund with interest was held admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2590