https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35410 The appeal was filed against the rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 53,30862/- due to discrepancies in duty payment arising from varying exchange rates. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, ruled that the burden of duty was not passed on to the customer, highlighting the importance of evidence in proving non-passing of duty. Refund claims must demonstrate that duty was not transferred to the buyer, with the burden of proof resting on the claimant under Section 11B. The Tribunal emphasized that if the duty was not reimbursed or recovered, refund claims are legally inadmissible under Central Excise Law. en-us Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35410 The appeal was filed against the rejection of a refund claim of Rs. 53,30862/- due to discrepancies in duty payment arising from varying exchange rates. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, ruled that the burden of duty was not passed on to the customer, highlighting the importance of evidence in proving non-passing of duty. Refund claims must demonstrate that duty was not transferred to the buyer, with the burden of proof resting on the claimant under Section 11B. The Tribunal emphasized that if the duty was not reimbursed or recovered, refund claims are legally inadmissible under Central Excise Law. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35410