https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45486 Refund of central excise duty must be pursued within the statutory refund scheme, and Article 226 cannot be used to bypass the Act's limitation and procedural requirements. A refund application filed beyond the prescribed six-month period was held time-barred, and an earlier letter that merely indicated an intention to seek refund was not a valid claim or effective protest for the relevant past period. Relief was also denied because there was no material to rebut the presumption that the duty burden had been passed on to buyers, and refund in such circumstances would amount to unjust enrichment. en-us Mon, 29 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:34:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45486 Refund of central excise duty must be pursued within the statutory refund scheme, and Article 226 cannot be used to bypass the Act's limitation and procedural requirements. A refund application filed beyond the prescribed six-month period was held time-barred, and an earlier letter that merely indicated an intention to seek refund was not a valid claim or effective protest for the relevant past period. Relief was also denied because there was no material to rebut the presumption that the duty burden had been passed on to buyers, and refund in such circumstances would amount to unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45486