https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47819 A refund claim was not defeated by a limitation objection that had already been decided against the Revenue and had attained finality, so the point could not be reopened. Duty paid during the pendency of the dispute was treated as payment under protest because the assessee's letter recorded that position, and procedural objections could not defeat the refund claim. On the evidence of buyers' correspondence showing that no duty burden had been passed on through supplementary invoices, unjust enrichment did not apply. The assessee was therefore entitled to refund of the excise duty. en-us Thu, 13 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jul 2010 10:55:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47819 A refund claim was not defeated by a limitation objection that had already been decided against the Revenue and had attained finality, so the point could not be reopened. Duty paid during the pendency of the dispute was treated as payment under protest because the assessee's letter recorded that position, and procedural objections could not defeat the refund claim. On the evidence of buyers' correspondence showing that no duty burden had been passed on through supplementary invoices, unjust enrichment did not apply. The assessee was therefore entitled to refund of the excise duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47819