Investigative deposits treated as refundable sums, with limitation and unjust enrichment held inapplicable to the refund claim.

Amounts deposited during investigation and kept in suspense pending scrutiny were treated as deposits under protest, not as duty. On that basis, the six-month limitation under the Central Excise refund provisions did not apply, and the claim was not time-barred. The doctrine of unjust enrichment was also held inapplicable to such investigative deposits in the same manner as duty payments, and Rule 230B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not attracted. The refund was therefore held admissible with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether amounts deposited during investigation, and later sought to be refunded after the adjudication proceedings were dropped, were refundable as deposits and not duty, and whether such refund was barred by limitation or by the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The amounts were deposited during investigation under letters describing them as being kept in suspense and subject to adjustment after scrutiny. The adjudication proceedings ultimately ended in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal treated such investigative deposits as deemed to have been made under protest and held that they could not be equated with duty for the purpose of applying the six-month limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It also accepted the view that deposits made during adjudication or investigation are not hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment in the same manner as duty payments, and that Rule 230B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not attracted.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not time-barred, the sums were refundable as deposits, and the assessee was entitled to refund with consequential relief.

Final Conclusion: The impugned rejection of refund was set aside and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Amounts deposited during investigation, which are not duty payments and are made subject to adjustment or pending adjudication, are to be treated as deposits made under protest and are not governed by the limitation and unjust enrichment restrictions applicable to refund of duty.

---