https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54830 Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as directory rather than mandatory, so a refund claim for duty paid under protest was not defeated by alleged procedural non-compliance or limitation. The Tribunal also held that unjust enrichment was not established merely because the contract price was stated to be inclusive of duty and taxes, where the assessee had consistently disputed excisability and the incidence of duty was not shown to have been passed on to buyers. The refund was therefore not liable to credit to the Consumer Welfare Fund and was payable to the assessee. en-us Fri, 14 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:54:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54830 Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as directory rather than mandatory, so a refund claim for duty paid under protest was not defeated by alleged procedural non-compliance or limitation. The Tribunal also held that unjust enrichment was not established merely because the contract price was stated to be inclusive of duty and taxes, where the assessee had consistently disputed excisability and the incidence of duty was not shown to have been passed on to buyers. The refund was therefore not liable to credit to the Consumer Welfare Fund and was payable to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54830