https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392996 Refund of excess tax was held payable to the person who ultimately bore the tax burden on inter-State diesel purchases for mining use. The court reasoned that the petitioners had paid the higher tax after denial of C forms, had borne the incidence of tax themselves, and were therefore entitled to direct refund from the Gujarat authorities despite the seller having deposited the amount. The doctrine of unjust enrichment did not apply because refund to the seller would have returned money to a party that had already recovered it from the petitioners, making any intermediary refund legally and practically untenable. The refund claim was to be processed in favour of the petitioners. en-us Wed, 18 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jun 2022 14:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392996 Refund of excess tax was held payable to the person who ultimately bore the tax burden on inter-State diesel purchases for mining use. The court reasoned that the petitioners had paid the higher tax after denial of C forms, had borne the incidence of tax themselves, and were therefore entitled to direct refund from the Gujarat authorities despite the seller having deposited the amount. The doctrine of unjust enrichment did not apply because refund to the seller would have returned money to a party that had already recovered it from the petitioners, making any intermediary refund legally and practically untenable. The refund claim was to be processed in favour of the petitioners. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 18 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392996