https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335185 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of electronic energy meters, directing the revenue authority to grant a refund of excess Excise Duty paid along with interest within 90 days. The decision emphasized the appellant's successful challenge to the doctrine of unjust enrichment by demonstrating that they did not receive more than the settled price per meter, aligning with a Supreme Court ruling on novation of purchase orders and revised pricing. This case establishes the importance of proving non-passing of duty burden to support refund claims and clarifies the legal implications of duty burden transfer in commercial transactions involving excisable goods. en-us Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335185 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of electronic energy meters, directing the revenue authority to grant a refund of excess Excise Duty paid along with interest within 90 days. The decision emphasized the appellant's successful challenge to the doctrine of unjust enrichment by demonstrating that they did not receive more than the settled price per meter, aligning with a Supreme Court ruling on novation of purchase orders and revised pricing. This case establishes the importance of proving non-passing of duty burden to support refund claims and clarifies the legal implications of duty burden transfer in commercial transactions involving excisable goods. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335185