https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51691 Refund of duty deposited during pendency of appeal, where the claim was directly relatable to set-off of duty on inputs under Notification No. 201/79, was held not to attract the bar of unjust enrichment. The proviso to Section 11B(2) excludes such refund claims from unjust enrichment where they concern credit of duty paid on excisable goods used as inputs in accordance with a rule or notification under the Act. The contrary Supreme Court authority was found inapplicable on the facts, and the refund rejection was set aside with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:37:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51691 Refund of duty deposited during pendency of appeal, where the claim was directly relatable to set-off of duty on inputs under Notification No. 201/79, was held not to attract the bar of unjust enrichment. The proviso to Section 11B(2) excludes such refund claims from unjust enrichment where they concern credit of duty paid on excisable goods used as inputs in accordance with a rule or notification under the Act. The contrary Supreme Court authority was found inapplicable on the facts, and the refund rejection was set aside with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51691