Unjust enrichment in customs refund claims can be rebutted by audited records, sale documents, and proof the duty was not passed on.

Documentary evidence such as sales invoices, Form F records, audited accounts, balance sheets, a stock and sales chart, and a chartered accountant's certificate can rebut the presumption of unjust enrichment in a customs refund claim. Where those materials show the disputed duty as recoverable and indicate that the goods were sold below landed cost, the incidence of duty is not treated as passed on to buyers. In the absence of any contrary evidence from the Revenue, refund cannot be denied on the ground of unjust enrichment.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred by unjust enrichment on the ground that the assessee had passed on the incidence of customs duty to buyers.

Analysis: The assessee produced sales invoices, Form F documents, audited books of account, balance sheets showing the disputed amount as customs duty recoverable, a stock and sales chart, and a chartered accountant's certificate. The material also showed that the goods were sold at prices below landed cost, supporting the plea that the duty burden was not absorbed in the sale price. In the absence of any contrary evidence from the Revenue, such documentary proof was sufficient to rebut unjust enrichment. The same set of documents had also been accepted in a similar refund granted in the assessee's own case, and the Revenue had not challenged that order.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not hit by unjust enrichment and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee substantiates non-passing of duty incidence through audited accounts, balance sheets, supporting certificates, and contemporaneous sale documents, and the Revenue adduces no contrary evidence, the refund cannot be denied on the ground of unjust enrichment.

---