https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413537 An excess payment made during investigation was held not to be denied refund solely on the ground of limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, once the excess payment is established. However, the refund claim could not be sanctioned on the existing record because the supporting materials were found insufficient, the chartered accountant's certificate was treated as self-serving, and unjust enrichment had to be examined before any refund could be granted. The matter therefore required fresh adjudication on proof and enrichment before reconsideration of the claim. en-us Tue, 12 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Dec 2021 17:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413537 An excess payment made during investigation was held not to be denied refund solely on the ground of limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, once the excess payment is established. However, the refund claim could not be sanctioned on the existing record because the supporting materials were found insufficient, the chartered accountant's certificate was treated as self-serving, and unjust enrichment had to be examined before any refund could be granted. The matter therefore required fresh adjudication on proof and enrichment before reconsideration of the claim. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 12 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413537