https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2639 Filing an appeal against denial of CT-2 certificates was treated as protest, so duty paid during the pendency of that challenge was regarded as payment under protest and the refund could not be rejected as time-barred. On unjust enrichment, the assessee relied on a chartered accountant's certificate and price-fixation material to show that the excise duty element on naphtha was not recovered from customers and that the urea price was fixed exclusive of that duty. Because that evidence had not been properly examined, the unjust enrichment issue was remanded for fresh consideration. en-us Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2639 Filing an appeal against denial of CT-2 certificates was treated as protest, so duty paid during the pendency of that challenge was regarded as payment under protest and the refund could not be rejected as time-barred. On unjust enrichment, the assessee relied on a chartered accountant's certificate and price-fixation material to show that the excise duty element on naphtha was not recovered from customers and that the urea price was fixed exclusive of that duty. Because that evidence had not been properly examined, the unjust enrichment issue was remanded for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2639