Unjust enrichment bars customs duty refund where price lists alone do not prove the duty burden was not passed on.

A refund claim for excess customs duty was examined against the bar of unjust enrichment under Section 27(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The evidence relied on to show that the duty burden had not been passed on consisted only of price lists for a few months, which was held insufficient because market price may be affected by several factors and a stable sale price does not by itself prove that the incidence of duty remained with the importer. The bar of unjust enrichment therefore applied, and the refund claim was not allowable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim of excess customs duty was hit by the bar of unjust enrichment under Section 27(2) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The evidence produced to show that the duty burden had not been passed on consisted only of price lists for a few months. This was held insufficient to establish that the incidence of excess duty was not recovered from customers, since market price may be influenced by several factors and a constant sale price does not by itself prove that the duty burden remained with the importer.

Conclusion: The bar of unjust enrichment applied, and the refund claim was not allowable.

---