https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362028 Refunds arising from provisional assessments before 25 June 1999 were not subject to unjust enrichment under Rule 9B(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because that requirement took effect only from that date and could not apply retrospectively. Differential duty on design and engineering charges could not be re-adjudicated where an earlier appellate order had set aside that demand and remanded the matter solely to examine refund eligibility. The adjudicating authority must remain within the scope of remand once an appellate finding has attained finality. The departmental appeal failed and the refund order remained sustained. en-us Thu, 10 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:24:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362028 Refunds arising from provisional assessments before 25 June 1999 were not subject to unjust enrichment under Rule 9B(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because that requirement took effect only from that date and could not apply retrospectively. Differential duty on design and engineering charges could not be re-adjudicated where an earlier appellate order had set aside that demand and remanded the matter solely to examine refund eligibility. The adjudicating authority must remain within the scope of remand once an appellate finding has attained finality. The departmental appeal failed and the refund order remained sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362028