https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30697 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD rejected the refund claims initially due to non-compliance with prescribed procedures and failure to reverse Cenvat credit. The Department argued only manufacturers could file refund claims, questioning the correlation between purchased and supplied goods. The appellants, citing relevant notifications and the doctrine of unjust enrichment, contested these arguments. Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing the refund claims subject to verification of duty amounts, emphasizing adherence to procedures and proper correlation between purchased and supplied goods for refund eligibility. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30697 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD rejected the refund claims initially due to non-compliance with prescribed procedures and failure to reverse Cenvat credit. The Department argued only manufacturers could file refund claims, questioning the correlation between purchased and supplied goods. The appellants, citing relevant notifications and the doctrine of unjust enrichment, contested these arguments. Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing the refund claims subject to verification of duty amounts, emphasizing adherence to procedures and proper correlation between purchased and supplied goods for refund eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30697