https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2686 The appeal was rejected by the Tribunal as the appellant failed to provide evidence of non-passing of the refund amount. The Tribunal found that the appellant should not have availed credit or paid duty under protest for duty-exempted products. The agreement between the appellant and the principal manufacturer indicated that liabilities were on the manufacturer, and there was no evidence that the amount reversed was not reimbursed. Consequently, the rejection of the refund claim was upheld on 27-8-2007. en-us Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2686 The appeal was rejected by the Tribunal as the appellant failed to provide evidence of non-passing of the refund amount. The Tribunal found that the appellant should not have availed credit or paid duty under protest for duty-exempted products. The agreement between the appellant and the principal manufacturer indicated that liabilities were on the manufacturer, and there was no evidence that the amount reversed was not reimbursed. Consequently, the rejection of the refund claim was upheld on 27-8-2007. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2686