https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50874 Refund under Rule 173L was treated as admissible where customers returned sub-standard goods, the goods were received back in the factory after D-3 intimation, remade, and cleared again on payment of duty. The same duty chain at the relevant stages satisfied the rule's essential requirements, so the refund claim was maintained in favour of the assessee. The unjust enrichment objection also failed because the returned goods left the stream of consumption and the burden of the original duty could not be said to have been passed on in the relevant sense. The Revenue's appeals were unsuccessful. en-us Thu, 27 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 11:20:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50874 Refund under Rule 173L was treated as admissible where customers returned sub-standard goods, the goods were received back in the factory after D-3 intimation, remade, and cleared again on payment of duty. The same duty chain at the relevant stages satisfied the rule's essential requirements, so the refund claim was maintained in favour of the assessee. The unjust enrichment objection also failed because the returned goods left the stream of consumption and the burden of the original duty could not be said to have been passed on in the relevant sense. The Revenue's appeals were unsuccessful. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50874