Unjust enrichment in refund claims fails when supported records and a Cost Accountant's certificate show duty was not passed on.

A refund claim could not be denied on unjust enrichment where a duly supported Cost Accountant's certificate, read with the assessee's records, established that the duty burden had not been passed on to customers. The adjudicating authority rejected the claim without properly dealing with that evidence or producing contrary material, while the appellate finding was supported by the record and unrebutted by the revenue. On that basis, the rejection of refund was held unsustainable and the refund entitlement was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred by unjust enrichment and whether the Cost Accountant's certificate, supported by the records, was sufficient to establish that the incidence of duty had not been passed on.

Analysis: The matter had earlier been remanded with a direction to produce evidence, including the Cost Accountant's certificate, on the question of unjust enrichment. The assessee produced the certificate before the adjudicating authority, and the certificate stated that the relevant accounts and records had been examined and that the duty burden had not been passed on to customers. The adjudicating authority rejected the claim without adequately considering the evidence or obtaining contrary material. The appellate authority's finding was supported by the records and by the absence of rebuttal from the revenue.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not hit by unjust enrichment, and the rejection of the refund was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The revenue's challenge failed, and the refund entitlement recorded by the appellate authority was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a duly supported Cost Accountant's certificate establishes non-passing of duty and the revenue adduces no contrary evidence, a refund claim cannot be rejected merely on presumptive doubts about unjust enrichment.

---