https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766686 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that refund claim was not time-barred as limitation period commenced from final adjudication date (13.10.2015) when department's appeal was dismissed, not from earlier provisional assessment. Appellant's refund application filed on 30.11.2015 was within prescribed period. Tribunal ruled unjust enrichment doctrine did not apply as chartered accountant's certificate confirming duty incidence was not passed to customers was wrongly dismissed by lower authorities without cogent reasons. Appeal allowed, refund granted. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Feb 2025 14:58:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766686 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that refund claim was not time-barred as limitation period commenced from final adjudication date (13.10.2015) when department's appeal was dismissed, not from earlier provisional assessment. Appellant's refund application filed on 30.11.2015 was within prescribed period. Tribunal ruled unjust enrichment doctrine did not apply as chartered accountant's certificate confirming duty incidence was not passed to customers was wrongly dismissed by lower authorities without cogent reasons. Appeal allowed, refund granted. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766686