Refund amendment applies only to pending claims; a final appellate refund order cannot be reopened by unjust enrichment rules.

A retrospective refund amendment under the Central Excise and Customs Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 was confined to pending refund matters and did not reopen a refund claim that had already been finally decided in appeal. Once the appellate authority allowed the refund and no further appeal was filed, that order attained finality and the department was bound to give effect to it. In that situation, the amended Section 11B and the doctrine of unjust enrichment could not be used to require the assessee to prove again that the duty incidence had not been passed on to customers. The legal point is that a statutory refund condition cannot govern a concluded proceeding.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amended refund provision, inserted by the Central Excise and Customs Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991, applied to a refund claim that had already culminated in a final appellate order, and whether the assessee was required to independently prove that the duty incidence had not been passed on to customers.

Analysis: The refund application had been rejected by the original authority but allowed in appeal, and no further appeal was filed. That appellate order attained finality. The later administrative request for refund did not reopen the concluded proceeding or convert it into a pending refund claim. The retrospective operation of the amended Section 11B was held to be confined to pending refund matters and did not extend to proceedings that had already ended before the amendment came into force. Once the refund had been ordered by the appellate authority, the departmental authorities were bound to act in accordance with that order. In those circumstances, the plea of unjust enrichment could not be invoked to compel the assessee to prove afresh that the burden had not been passed on.

Conclusion: The amended Section 11B did not apply to the concluded refund proceeding, and the assessee was not required to establish non-passing of the duty burden. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory amendment introducing refund conditions applies only to pending proceedings and cannot reopen or govern a refund claim that has already been finally decided by a competent appellate authority.

---