https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52671 Duty paid under the Compounded Levy Scheme remained duty of excise, so any refund claim was governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act and the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The claimant had to show that the excess duty had not been passed on to buyers, but no evidence of differential pricing or other material was produced to rebut that presumption. In the absence of proof that the duty burden was not transferred, the refund claim was not maintainable and was rejected. en-us Thu, 22 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 11:08:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52671 Duty paid under the Compounded Levy Scheme remained duty of excise, so any refund claim was governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act and the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The claimant had to show that the excess duty had not been passed on to buyers, but no evidence of differential pricing or other material was produced to rebut that presumption. In the absence of proof that the duty burden was not transferred, the refund claim was not maintainable and was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52671