https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32917 A refund claim under service tax was examined on the question whether it was barred by unjust enrichment, namely whether the tax incidence had been passed on to customers. The claim was supported by the position that the service provider received only commission for the service rendered and had not collected any service tax from the service recipient. The delayed deposit of service tax after the service period and receipt of consideration also supported the conclusion that the tax burden was borne by the claimant. The refund was therefore held admissible and the unjust enrichment bar was not attracted. en-us Wed, 19 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32917 A refund claim under service tax was examined on the question whether it was barred by unjust enrichment, namely whether the tax incidence had been passed on to customers. The claim was supported by the position that the service provider received only commission for the service rendered and had not collected any service tax from the service recipient. The delayed deposit of service tax after the service period and receipt of consideration also supported the conclusion that the tax burden was borne by the claimant. The refund was therefore held admissible and the unjust enrichment bar was not attracted. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 19 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32917