Refunds pre-2006 not unjust enrichment; Appellant granted refund without claim submission.

The Tribunal held that prior to 13/07/2006, refunds on finalization of provisional assessments under Section 18 of the Customs Act were not subject to unjust enrichment. The appellant's refund claim was allowed without the need for a claim submission, as the doctrine of unjust enrichment did not apply during that period. The appeal was granted, and the appellant was entitled to the refund without the application of unjust enrichment provisions.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issue involved is whether refund of custom duty arising out of finalization of provisional assessment, u/s 18 of the Customs Act, relatable to the period prior to 13/07/2006, when the provisions of Section 18 were amended, would attract the provisions of unjust enrichment or not.

Comprehensive Details:

Issue 1: Refund claim hit by unjust enrichment
The appellant filed 42 Bills of Entry which were provisionally assessed by the department with a 1% revenue deposit. Upon finalization of assessment, the appellant applied for a refund of the revenue deposit, which was denied on the ground of unjust enrichment. The Assistant Commissioner credited the refund amount to Consumer Welfare Fund, leading to dismissal of the appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 18 of Customs Act
The appellant contended that the refund claim is not hit by unjust enrichment as it arose from the finalization of provisional assessment prior to 13/07/2006. The main issue was whether refund of Customs duty in such cases would attract unjust enrichment. The appellant relied on previous decisions to support their argument that prior to 13/07/2006, refunds due on final assessment did not require a claim from the assessee and were not subject to unjust enrichment.

Judgment:
The Tribunal, after considering the arguments and the record, held that prior to 13/07/2006, the appellant is entitled to the refund on finalization of provisional assessment without the need for a claim submission, and such refunds are not subject to unjust enrichment. The doctrine of unjust enrichment was not applicable during that period, and the amended provisions of Section 18 were only applicable from 13/07/2006. Therefore, the appeal was allowed, granting the appellant the refund without the application of unjust enrichment provisions.

---