https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440203 The appellant, a supplier of Telecom equipment, filed a refund application for duty paid on software supplied to MTNL/BSNL. The court held that duty was correctly paid as the value of software was included in the assessable value. Despite the Original Authority finding that the value of software is not includable in the assessable value, the appellant failed to prove unjust enrichment. The First Appellate Authority upheld the rejection of the refund claim due to lack of evidence that duty incidence was not passed on to customers. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the denial of the refund claim. en-us Wed, 12 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jul 2023 16:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440203 The appellant, a supplier of Telecom equipment, filed a refund application for duty paid on software supplied to MTNL/BSNL. The court held that duty was correctly paid as the value of software was included in the assessable value. Despite the Original Authority finding that the value of software is not includable in the assessable value, the appellant failed to prove unjust enrichment. The First Appellate Authority upheld the rejection of the refund claim due to lack of evidence that duty incidence was not passed on to customers. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the denial of the refund claim. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440203