https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54389 Refund of duty paid on clearances to a 100% EOU could not be rejected solely for non-compliance with the AR-3 procedure where the goods were otherwise claimed to fall within the exemption notification and duty had been paid under mistake. The refund claim therefore had to be examined on merits, including whether the notification applied, and the bar of unjust enrichment. As the lower authority had rejected the claim only on merits and had not examined unjust enrichment, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on both aspects, with no final determination on the refund entitlement. en-us Fri, 13 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:59:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54389 Refund of duty paid on clearances to a 100% EOU could not be rejected solely for non-compliance with the AR-3 procedure where the goods were otherwise claimed to fall within the exemption notification and duty had been paid under mistake. The refund claim therefore had to be examined on merits, including whether the notification applied, and the bar of unjust enrichment. As the lower authority had rejected the claim only on merits and had not examined unjust enrichment, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on both aspects, with no final determination on the refund entitlement. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54389