https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31254 The appellant's refund claim for duty paid from Oct.'74 to Sept.'82, transferred to Consumer Welfare Fund, was allowed due to unjust enrichment. Another claim for duty paid from April, 1966 to Sept, 1974 was rejected as time-barred. Dispute on duty calculation under Notification No. 161/66-C.E favored the appellant's method, though duty was paid as per department's formula. Payment of duty under protest was partly refundable, exempt from time-bar provisions. Refund claim of Rs. 47,056/- was upheld, dismissing department's appeal on unjust enrichment grounds. Revenue's plea against the refund was denied. en-us Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31254 The appellant's refund claim for duty paid from Oct.'74 to Sept.'82, transferred to Consumer Welfare Fund, was allowed due to unjust enrichment. Another claim for duty paid from April, 1966 to Sept, 1974 was rejected as time-barred. Dispute on duty calculation under Notification No. 161/66-C.E favored the appellant's method, though duty was paid as per department's formula. Payment of duty under protest was partly refundable, exempt from time-bar provisions. Refund claim of Rs. 47,056/- was upheld, dismissing department's appeal on unjust enrichment grounds. Revenue's plea against the refund was denied. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31254