https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346102 Refund claims arising from depot clearances were required to satisfy the unjust enrichment bar under Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 by proving that excess duty paid was not passed on to buyers. The claimant relied on Chartered Accountant certificates and price data, but these only showed that duty paid at the factory gate exceeded duty payable on the relevant valuation basis. As depot invoices did not separately show excise duty and the full invoice amount was recovered from buyers, the evidence supported a presumption that the duty burden had been transferred. The cited authorities were distinguished on their facts, and the refund claims were therefore not admissible. en-us Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Sep 2017 14:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346102 Refund claims arising from depot clearances were required to satisfy the unjust enrichment bar under Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 by proving that excess duty paid was not passed on to buyers. The claimant relied on Chartered Accountant certificates and price data, but these only showed that duty paid at the factory gate exceeded duty payable on the relevant valuation basis. As depot invoices did not separately show excise duty and the full invoice amount was recovered from buyers, the evidence supported a presumption that the duty burden had been transferred. The cited authorities were distinguished on their facts, and the refund claims were therefore not admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346102