https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33514 Refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessments was subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment under the amended Section 11B of the Central Excise Act and Rule 9B(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, with the legal position treated as clarified from 1-8-1998. The fact that part of the excess duty related to an earlier sub-period did not remove the claim from that bar. However, because the excess amount had been credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund at finalisation without giving the assessee an opportunity to rebut the presumption that the duty burden was passed on, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after allowing evidence on incidence of duty. en-us Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33514 Refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessments was subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment under the amended Section 11B of the Central Excise Act and Rule 9B(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, with the legal position treated as clarified from 1-8-1998. The fact that part of the excess duty related to an earlier sub-period did not remove the claim from that bar. However, because the excess amount had been credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund at finalisation without giving the assessee an opportunity to rebut the presumption that the duty burden was passed on, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after allowing evidence on incidence of duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33514