Erroneous excise refund recovery and unjust enrichment govern appellate refund claims from provisional assessment finalisation.

An erroneous excise refund may be recovered under Section 11A even if the refund order was not first reviewed under Section 35E(2), and such recovery is not barred on that ground. Refunds arising consequentially from appellate relief against finalisation of provisional assessment are governed by Section 11B and remain subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The stated ratio is that appellate-stage refund claims linked to provisional assessment fall within Section 11B, while the department can proceed under Section 11A to recover a refund found to have been wrongly granted.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether recovery of an allegedly erroneous refund could be made under Section 11A without reviewing the refund order under Section 35E(2). (ii) Whether refund arising from appellate relief against finalization of provisional assessment was governed by Section 11B and the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Issue (i): Whether recovery of an allegedly erroneous refund could be made under Section 11A without reviewing the refund order under Section 35E(2).

Analysis: The refund had been sanctioned earlier and the department sought recovery on the footing that it was erroneously granted. The challenge that a review under Section 35E(2) was a necessary precondition was rejected. A demand notice under Section 11A was held competent for recovery of duty that had been erroneously refunded, and the absence of a separate review of the refund order did not bar such action.

Conclusion: The recovery under Section 11A was valid without prior review under Section 35E(2), against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether refund arising from appellate relief against finalization of provisional assessment was governed by Section 11B and the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The refund did not arise as a direct adjustment on final assessment by the proper officer; it arose as a consequence of appellate orders setting aside or modifying the finalization of provisional assessment. On the construction of the governing provision and the Supreme Court's exposition, such refund claims consequential to an appeal against final assessment are governed by Section 11B. The doctrine of unjust enrichment therefore applied, and the contrary view that Section 11B was inapplicable could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The refund was governed by Section 11B and was subject to unjust enrichment, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was unsustainable, and the department was entitled to recover the refunded amount.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund that arises consequentially from appellate relief against finalization of provisional assessment is governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and an erroneous refund may be recovered under Section 11A without first reviewing the refund order under Section 35E(2).

---