https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46679 The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, confirming that the duty was leviable under a specific sub-heading of the Central Excise Act, different from the one previously paid under protest. The Court agreed with the Tribunal that the application for refund was premature until the final dispute on classification was resolved. The Court dismissed the appeal on the issue of passing on the burden of higher duty to customers but allowed the appellant to contest findings before the Tribunal. The Court suggested that the issue of unjust enrichment could be raised before the Tribunal upon remand, without directing the initiation of fresh proceedings. en-us Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46679 The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, confirming that the duty was leviable under a specific sub-heading of the Central Excise Act, different from the one previously paid under protest. The Court agreed with the Tribunal that the application for refund was premature until the final dispute on classification was resolved. The Court dismissed the appeal on the issue of passing on the burden of higher duty to customers but allowed the appellant to contest findings before the Tribunal. The Court suggested that the issue of unjust enrichment could be raised before the Tribunal upon remand, without directing the initiation of fresh proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46679