https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330295 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a cement manufacturer, allowing their refund claim for excess duty paid on cement cleared without RSP affixed. The Tribunal determined that the excess duty was a deposit, not duty, and therefore not subject to unjust enrichment. By differentiating between duty and deposit and considering legal precedents and the corrective nature of corrigendum, the Tribunal held that the excess amount lacked the character of duty. This decision granted the appellant the refund claim and any consequential reliefs sought. en-us Wed, 08 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Feb 2018 10:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330295 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a cement manufacturer, allowing their refund claim for excess duty paid on cement cleared without RSP affixed. The Tribunal determined that the excess duty was a deposit, not duty, and therefore not subject to unjust enrichment. By differentiating between duty and deposit and considering legal precedents and the corrective nature of corrigendum, the Tribunal held that the excess amount lacked the character of duty. This decision granted the appellant the refund claim and any consequential reliefs sought. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330295