Provisional assessment refund claims survive limitation, but refund must still satisfy the unjust enrichment test before sanction.

Refund claims linked to provisional assessment were held not to be barred by limitation where a subsequent assessment order had been passed and the earlier filing could not be ignored for limitation purposes. The refund issue was nevertheless remanded because the lower authority had not examined whether the incidence of duty had been passed on. The text states that refund cannot be sanctioned without testing unjust enrichment, and that requirement must be addressed before any grant of refund.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether refund applications filed before finalisation of provisional assessment were barred by limitation. (ii) Whether the refund claims required examination on the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Issue (i): Whether refund applications filed before finalisation of provisional assessment were barred by limitation.

Analysis: The refund claim was found to have been filed within limitation, as a subsequent assessment order had been passed and, in any event, the earlier filing before finalisation could not be ignored for limitation purposes.

Conclusion: The refund claims were not barred by limitation.

Issue (ii): Whether the refund claims required examination on the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: Refund cannot be sanctioned without examining whether the burden of duty had been passed on, and this aspect had not been examined by the lower authority.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded for examination of unjust enrichment.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed on limitation, but the refund issue was sent back for reconsideration on unjust enrichment.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund claim filed in the context of provisional assessment must be tested on the facts of finalisation and limitation, and every refund claim must also satisfy the doctrine of unjust enrichment before grant.

---