https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375222 Refund of excise duty paid through PLA was not barred by unjust enrichment where invoices reflected nil duty, the goods were shown as exempt, and documentary evidence such as Chartered Accountant certificates, ER-1 returns and an affidavit supported non-passing of the duty burden; accounting entries alone were insufficient to prove unjust enrichment. Refund of duty paid by utilising Cenvat credit also could not be denied merely because the final product was exempt, since the admissibility of credit could not be examined for the first time in refund proceedings and any recovery of wrongly availed credit had to be pursued under Rule 14 through proper notice. The refund denial was accordingly set aside. en-us Fri, 01 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Feb 2019 19:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375222 Refund of excise duty paid through PLA was not barred by unjust enrichment where invoices reflected nil duty, the goods were shown as exempt, and documentary evidence such as Chartered Accountant certificates, ER-1 returns and an affidavit supported non-passing of the duty burden; accounting entries alone were insufficient to prove unjust enrichment. Refund of duty paid by utilising Cenvat credit also could not be denied merely because the final product was exempt, since the admissibility of credit could not be examined for the first time in refund proceedings and any recovery of wrongly availed credit had to be pursued under Rule 14 through proper notice. The refund denial was accordingly set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375222