https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273744 The High Court upheld the refund claim by TNEB, ruling that TNEB is not liable for duty on RCC Poles as it was not considered the manufacturer. The court found that TNEB did not pass on the duty incidence to consumers, meeting the requirements of Sections 11B and 12B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court dismissed the appeal on unjust enrichment grounds, emphasizing that TNEB used the poles for its infrastructure and did not sell them. The refund was granted based on verified documentary evidence supporting TNEB's claim. en-us Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2018 21:59:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273744 The High Court upheld the refund claim by TNEB, ruling that TNEB is not liable for duty on RCC Poles as it was not considered the manufacturer. The court found that TNEB did not pass on the duty incidence to consumers, meeting the requirements of Sections 11B and 12B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court dismissed the appeal on unjust enrichment grounds, emphasizing that TNEB used the poles for its infrastructure and did not sell them. The refund was granted based on verified documentary evidence supporting TNEB's claim. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273744