https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348176 The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal and granted the refund claim, setting aside the impugned order. The tribunal held that since the appellant was not liable to pay service tax, the concept of unjust enrichment did not apply, leading to the allowance of the refund claim. The judgment emphasizes the importance of examining specific agreement terms and services provided to determine the applicability of unjust enrichment in refund claims, highlighting the need for a thorough analysis of contractual obligations to establish the party bearing the tax burden. en-us Tue, 29 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348176 The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal and granted the refund claim, setting aside the impugned order. The tribunal held that since the appellant was not liable to pay service tax, the concept of unjust enrichment did not apply, leading to the allowance of the refund claim. The judgment emphasizes the importance of examining specific agreement terms and services provided to determine the applicability of unjust enrichment in refund claims, highlighting the need for a thorough analysis of contractual obligations to establish the party bearing the tax burden. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348176