Tribunal grants refund in appeal, finding no unjust enrichment. Commercial invoices key.

The tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the appellants had not passed on the excess duty amount to their customers, as evidenced by commercial invoices showing a lower assessable value and duty amount paid by customers compared to what was paid to the Revenue. The tribunal held that the Revenue failed to provide evidence to support their claim of unjust enrichment, and therefore granted the refund of the overpaid duty amounting to Rs. 22,416 to the appellants.

---

---

Issues:
Refund of excess duty paid on physician's samples, unjust enrichment.

Analysis:
The appeal involved a dispute regarding the refund of duty amounting to Rs. 22,416, which the appellants had overpaid on physician's samples intended for free distribution to doctors. The excess duty payment resulted from an error in assessing the value of the samples at Rs. 25.35 per strip instead of the correct value of Rs. 20.68 per strip. The Deputy Commissioner initially accepted the refund claim on its merits but rejected it on the grounds of unjust enrichment, a decision that was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).

The appellants argued that they had not passed on the excess duty amount to their customers and provided commercial invoices showing a lower assessable value and duty amount paid by the customers compared to what was paid to the Revenue. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed this evidence, suggesting the invoices could have been manipulated or raised after the goods were cleared. However, the tribunal noted that the Revenue failed to present any evidence to support this claim. In the absence of contrary evidence, the tribunal found the appellants' documentation, including customer letters and lower-value invoices, to be sufficient proof that the excess duty had not been recovered from the customers. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the previous order and allowed the appeal, granting consequential relief to the appellants.

---