Unjust enrichment does not bar refund after finalisation of provisional assessment when duty was paid provisionally.

Refund arising on finalisation of provisional assessment is not barred by the doctrine of unjust enrichment where the duty was paid provisionally and the refund claim follows final assessment. The text notes that the Supreme Court had already recognised this principle, and that the relevant period predated the amendment to Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules. Applying the same line of reasoning used in earlier Tribunal decisions on similar facts, the refund was treated as admissible to the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund arising on finalization of provisional assessment is hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The assessments for the relevant period were found to be provisional, and the refund claim arose only after their finalization. The Tribunal noted that the Supreme Court had already held that unjust enrichment does not apply where duty is paid under provisional assessment and the refund results from final assessment. It also noted that the period involved was prior to the amendment to Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, and that the same principle had been applied in earlier Tribunal decisions on similar facts.

Conclusion: The doctrine of unjust enrichment was held not applicable, and the refund was held to be admissible in favour of the assessee.

---