Customs refund after provisional assessment remains subject to unjust enrichment and proof that duty incidence was not passed on.

Customs refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment remains subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, so the claimant must establish that the duty burden was not passed on. A separate challenge to the assessment order is not required where the refund claim was filed before finalisation of the Bills of Entry and the final assessment itself granted exemption, making the Priya Blue principle inapplicable on those facts. The claimed government control over fertilizer prices was treated as a relevant factual issue requiring verification. The refund was recognised on merits, but final relief depended on fresh examination of unjust enrichment and supporting evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment in customs is liable to be examined on the touchstone of unjust enrichment, and whether the claim could be rejected for not separately challenging the assessment order.

Analysis: The refund claim had been filed before finalisation of the Bills of Entry and the final assessment itself granted exemption from CVD on the imported sulphuric acid. In that situation, the question of challenging the assessment did not arise for the purpose of the refund claim. The principle in Priya Blue was therefore not attracted on the facts. As to unjust enrichment, the doctrine could not be excluded merely because the refund arose from finalisation of provisional assessment. The Customs law contains no lacuna comparable to the pre-amendment position under the Central Excise Rules, and refund claims must be scrutinised to see whether the duty burden was passed on. The claim that fertilizer prices were government-controlled was relevant and required proper factual examination.

Conclusion: The assessee was held entitled to the refund on merits, but the matter was remanded for fresh examination of unjust enrichment and production of supporting evidence.

Final Conclusion: The refund entitlement was recognised, but final grant of relief depended on verification that the duty incidence had not been passed on, which required reconsideration by the original authority.

Ratio Decidendi: A customs refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment is not immune from the doctrine of unjust enrichment, and the refund claimant must establish that the duty burden was not passed on, even where the final assessment itself recognises exemption.

---