https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40950 Excise valuation under the amended provision continued to exclude post-manufacturing expenses and profits attributable to post-manufacturing activity, so selling and distribution costs could not be added to assessable value. The High Court also held that a refund claim could not be rejected for lack of supporting material without first giving the claimant a fair opportunity to produce further evidence, and the authority's refusal on evidentiary insufficiency was unsustainable. The defences of alternative remedy, limitation, and unjust enrichment were rejected where duty had been collected without authority of law, and the impugned rejection of the refund claim was quashed with fresh consideration directed. en-us Fri, 26 Jun 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 May 2010 13:00:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40950 Excise valuation under the amended provision continued to exclude post-manufacturing expenses and profits attributable to post-manufacturing activity, so selling and distribution costs could not be added to assessable value. The High Court also held that a refund claim could not be rejected for lack of supporting material without first giving the claimant a fair opportunity to produce further evidence, and the authority's refusal on evidentiary insufficiency was unsustainable. The defences of alternative remedy, limitation, and unjust enrichment were rejected where duty had been collected without authority of law, and the impugned rejection of the refund claim was quashed with fresh consideration directed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 Jun 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40950