https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50076 Where the contractual price and contemporaneous correspondence showed that no excise duty element was built into the supply price, the duty burden was not treated as passed on to the buyer. The doctrine of unjust enrichment therefore did not bar refund of duty paid under protest, and the direction to credit the amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund could not be sustained. The refund was held admissible to the claimant. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Aug 2010 16:27:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50076 Where the contractual price and contemporaneous correspondence showed that no excise duty element was built into the supply price, the duty burden was not treated as passed on to the buyer. The doctrine of unjust enrichment therefore did not bar refund of duty paid under protest, and the direction to credit the amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund could not be sustained. The refund was held admissible to the claimant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50076