Unjust enrichment does not bar refund claims on captively consumed goods where earlier authority supports the assessee.

Refund claims for captively consumed goods were treated as not barred by unjust enrichment where the issue had already been settled in the assessee's favour. The Tribunal followed earlier authority holding that unjust enrichment did not defeat such claims and rejected the Commissioner's reliance on a pending challenge to the Bombay High Court decision as a basis to deny relief. The result was that the refund claim was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim in respect of captively consumed goods was barred by unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The issue was treated as already settled in the assessee's favour, and the Tribunal relied on the earlier order following the line of authority holding that unjust enrichment did not defeat the claim in such circumstances. The Commissioner's reliance on the challenge to the Bombay High Court decision was not accepted as sufficient to deny relief.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not defeated by unjust enrichment, and the appeal succeeded.

---