Unjust enrichment does not bar refund from provisional assessment finalised before the section 18 amendment.

Refund arising from finalization of provisional assessment before the 13-7-2006 amendment to section 18 of the Customs Act was held not to attract the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The Tribunal applied the Larger Bench ruling in Hindustan Zinc, following the Gujarat High Court decision in Hindalco Industries, and distinguished Bussa Overseas, Mafatlal Industries and Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal as not deciding this specific question. The refund claim was therefore allowed in favour of the assessee, and the Revenue's objection was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund arising on finalization of provisional assessment before 13-7-06 was hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The refund claim arose from finalization of provisional assessment and the relevant controversy was whether, prior to the amendment of section 18 of the Customs Act, the bar of unjust enrichment applied to such refunds. The Tribunal followed the Larger Bench decision in Hindustan Zinc, which in turn relied on the Gujarat High Court decision in Hindalco Industries, and held that refund consequent upon finalization of provisional assessment before 13-7-06 did not attract unjust enrichment. The Revenue's reliance on Bussa Overseas, Mafatlal Industries and Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal was found inapposite as those decisions did not decide this specific question.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's objection was rejected and the earlier allowance of refund relief to the assessee stood undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Refund arising from finalization of provisional assessment before the amendment of section 18 is not subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

---