https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356934 The tribunal rejected the appellant's refund claim for duty paid on old and used capital goods, citing insufficient evidence to establish the purchase date. The appellant failed to prove the goods were purchased before cenvat credit availability, with discrepancies in provided documents. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the rejection on grounds of unjust enrichment, as duty had been collected from the purchaser. Due to the lack of credible evidence and unjust enrichment concerns, the appeal was deemed meritless and dismissed. en-us Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Mar 2019 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356934 The tribunal rejected the appellant's refund claim for duty paid on old and used capital goods, citing insufficient evidence to establish the purchase date. The appellant failed to prove the goods were purchased before cenvat credit availability, with discrepancies in provided documents. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the rejection on grounds of unjust enrichment, as duty had been collected from the purchaser. Due to the lack of credible evidence and unjust enrichment concerns, the appeal was deemed meritless and dismissed. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356934