https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48944 The dominant issue was whether a refund claim was barred by unjust enrichment under s. 11B of the Central Excise Act where the claimant asserted that duty incidence was not passed on because credit notes were issued to the buyer. The Tribunal held that issuance of credit notes does not, by itself, take the claim outside s. 11B, and followed the view affirmed by the SC that the statutory bar applies notwithstanding such adjustments; contrary Tribunal precedent was treated as not good law. Consequently, the claimant failed to establish that the duty burden was borne by it, and the refund was denied; the appeal was dismissed. en-us Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Dec 2025 17:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48944 The dominant issue was whether a refund claim was barred by unjust enrichment under s. 11B of the Central Excise Act where the claimant asserted that duty incidence was not passed on because credit notes were issued to the buyer. The Tribunal held that issuance of credit notes does not, by itself, take the claim outside s. 11B, and followed the view affirmed by the SC that the statutory bar applies notwithstanding such adjustments; contrary Tribunal precedent was treated as not good law. Consequently, the claimant failed to establish that the duty burden was borne by it, and the refund was denied; the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48944