https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387806 Pipes supplied for a water supply project were treated as covered by Notification No. 6/2006-CE where a competent government certificate identified the project and showed compliance with the exemption conditions, so the refund claim was held maintainable on merits. The refund was nevertheless left open for verification under the bar of unjust enrichment, because the lower authorities had questioned whether the duty incidence had been passed on. The exemption issue was therefore resolved in favour of the assessee, while the refund claim remained subject to scrutiny only on unjust enrichment. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Nov 2019 10:55:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387806 Pipes supplied for a water supply project were treated as covered by Notification No. 6/2006-CE where a competent government certificate identified the project and showed compliance with the exemption conditions, so the refund claim was held maintainable on merits. The refund was nevertheless left open for verification under the bar of unjust enrichment, because the lower authorities had questioned whether the duty incidence had been passed on. The exemption issue was therefore resolved in favour of the assessee, while the refund claim remained subject to scrutiny only on unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387806