https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53726 Refund claims based on alleged provisional duty payments were barred by limitation because no application for provisional assessment was made and no provisional assessment order was passed; commercial descriptions of prices as provisional did not satisfy the statutory mechanism. The rejection of those refund claims was therefore upheld. Where supply contracts contained a price variation clause and the final price was later reduced, with excess duty adjusted through subsequent payments, the incidence of duty was not shown to have been passed on to buyers. On those facts, unjust enrichment did not bar the refund, and the Revenue's challenge failed. en-us Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Oct 2010 17:56:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53726 Refund claims based on alleged provisional duty payments were barred by limitation because no application for provisional assessment was made and no provisional assessment order was passed; commercial descriptions of prices as provisional did not satisfy the statutory mechanism. The rejection of those refund claims was therefore upheld. Where supply contracts contained a price variation clause and the final price was later reduced, with excess duty adjusted through subsequent payments, the incidence of duty was not shown to have been passed on to buyers. On those facts, unjust enrichment did not bar the refund, and the Revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53726