https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84102 The appellant is entitled to refund of the amount deposited 'under protest' during the pendency of adjudication proceedings and investigation, as it cannot be considered payment of duty and is not hit by the bar of unjust enrichment u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The deposit made from April 2016 to June 2017, when no show cause notice was issued, was merely a precautionary measure and cannot be characterized as 'duty'. Relying on judicial precedents, the Tribunal held that such deposits are not subject to unjust enrichment principles and allowed the refund claim, setting aside the impugned orders. en-us Thu, 19 Dec 2024 08:47:41 +0530 Thu, 19 Dec 2024 08:47:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84102 The appellant is entitled to refund of the amount deposited 'under protest' during the pendency of adjudication proceedings and investigation, as it cannot be considered payment of duty and is not hit by the bar of unjust enrichment u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The deposit made from April 2016 to June 2017, when no show cause notice was issued, was merely a precautionary measure and cannot be characterized as 'duty'. Relying on judicial precedents, the Tribunal held that such deposits are not subject to unjust enrichment principles and allowed the refund claim, setting aside the impugned orders. Highlights Central Excise Thu, 19 Dec 2024 08:47:41 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=84102