https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345283 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case back to the Original Authority for re-examination of the unjust enrichment issue. The appellant, a telecom equipment manufacturer, sought a refund of overpaid duty. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund, citing unjust enrichment and limitation issues. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection due to lack of proof that duty incidence wasn't passed on to customers. The Tribunal directed the appellant to provide a Chartered Accountant's certificate to reassess the unjust enrichment claim, emphasizing the need for transaction certification to determine duty implications. en-us Thu, 29 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Jul 2017 10:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345283 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case back to the Original Authority for re-examination of the unjust enrichment issue. The appellant, a telecom equipment manufacturer, sought a refund of overpaid duty. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund, citing unjust enrichment and limitation issues. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection due to lack of proof that duty incidence wasn't passed on to customers. The Tribunal directed the appellant to provide a Chartered Accountant's certificate to reassess the unjust enrichment claim, emphasizing the need for transaction certification to determine duty implications. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 29 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345283