Excise duty refund barred by unjust enrichment where duty burden was passed on to buyers.

Amounts paid on clearance of goods were treated in the statutory records as Central Excise duty, including on gate passes, in the protest letter under Rule 233B, and in the refund application under Section 11B and Rule 173S. On that basis, the claim fell within Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Because the duty burden had been passed on to the buyers, the statutory bar of unjust enrichment applied, and the refund claim was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amount paid on clearance of the goods was excise duty so as to attract Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and whether the refund claim was barred by unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The amount paid was treated throughout the statutory records as duty of excise. The gate passes described it as duty, and the letter of protest also proceeded on that basis under Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The refund application itself was made under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 173S of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, which confirmed that the claim was for Central Excise duty. Since the duty burden had admittedly been passed on to the buyers, the statutory bar of unjust enrichment applied.

Conclusion: The amount was excise duty, Section 11B applied, and the refund claim was rightly rejected as barred by unjust enrichment.

---