Refund hit by unjust enrichment if no documents produced to prove non-passing of incidence of Duty to Buyers

Aurolab Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)

The issue is whether the refund claim is hit by the bar of unjust enrichment. Undisputedly, the appellant has mentioned the duty element in the invoices issued to the buyers. The presumption envisaged in section 12B of Central Excise Act, 1944 then applies and the burden rests upon the appellant to rebut this presumption. In para 12 of the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed that though the appellants produced Cost Accountant and Charte

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.