https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371662 The Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents, disallowing the deduction claimed for secondary packing and rejecting the demand for differential Excise Duty. The Tribunal emphasized that the cost of secondary packing was not part of the assessable value. The Tribunal also upheld the refund claim for duty paid under protest, citing settled law on the inclusion of secondary packing costs in assessable value. However, the Tribunal remanded the case to consider the principle of unjust enrichment before granting the refund, aligning with legal requirements under the Central Excise Act. en-us Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Dec 2018 06:36:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371662 The Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents, disallowing the deduction claimed for secondary packing and rejecting the demand for differential Excise Duty. The Tribunal emphasized that the cost of secondary packing was not part of the assessable value. The Tribunal also upheld the refund claim for duty paid under protest, citing settled law on the inclusion of secondary packing costs in assessable value. However, the Tribunal remanded the case to consider the principle of unjust enrichment before granting the refund, aligning with legal requirements under the Central Excise Act. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371662