Unjust enrichment does not bar refund on finalisation of provisional assessment for the pre-25.06.1999 period.
Refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment for the period before 25.06.1999 is not governed by the doctrine of unjust enrichment, because the relevant linking proviso under Rule 9B(5) was not then in force. The Larger Bench view was followed, and the refund could not be denied on that ground. The preliminary objection seeking reconsideration of the reference was rejected because the reference was read as confined to the unjust enrichment question actually referred for decision.
Issues: (i) Whether the reference to the Larger Bench required reconsideration on the ground that only one of the referred questions was answered. (ii) Whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies to refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment for the period prior to 25.06.1999.
Issue (i): Whether the reference to the Larger Bench required reconsideration on the ground that only one of the referred questions was answered.
Analysis: The reference order was read as having referred only the question concerning the applicability of unjust enrichment to refunds arising on finalisation of provisional assessment. The existence of an additional question in the referral order did not alter the scope of the issue actually referred for decision, and no basis was found to send the matter back for reconsideration.
Conclusion: The preliminary objection was rejected.
Issue (ii): Whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies to refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment for the period prior to 25.06.1999.
Analysis: The Larger Bench ruling was followed, holding that the linking proviso under Rule 9B(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was not in existence for the relevant period prior to 25.06.1999. On that basis, the doctrine of unjust enrichment was held not to govern such refunds, and the refund could not be denied on that ground.
Conclusion: The doctrine of unjust enrichment was held not applicable to the refund in question.
Final Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to refund with consequential relief, and the Revenue's challenge failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment for the period before the commencement of the relevant linking proviso is not subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
