https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54920 A set-off amount arising under a duty-reduction notification was treated as distinct from input credit for transitional transfer under Rule 57H(3), so it could not be characterised as credit under a special procedure for duty-paid materials; however, the Tribunal still recognised that the accumulated amount could be taken into the Modvat/Cenvat register and used for duty payment on eligible final products. A cash refund was denied because the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies where duty incidence has been passed on, and the claim was held outside Section 11B(2)(c), which concerns refund of input-credit in accordance with the rules. The refund claim therefore failed. en-us Tue, 25 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:22:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54920 A set-off amount arising under a duty-reduction notification was treated as distinct from input credit for transitional transfer under Rule 57H(3), so it could not be characterised as credit under a special procedure for duty-paid materials; however, the Tribunal still recognised that the accumulated amount could be taken into the Modvat/Cenvat register and used for duty payment on eligible final products. A cash refund was denied because the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies where duty incidence has been passed on, and the claim was held outside Section 11B(2)(c), which concerns refund of input-credit in accordance with the rules. The refund claim therefore failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 25 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54920