Unjust enrichment does not govern customs refunds arising from finalisation of provisional assessment.

Refunds arising from finalisation of provisional assessment under customs law are not governed by the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The Tribunal treated the customs framework for finalising provisional assessments as parallel to the Central Excise regime considered by the Supreme Court under Rule 9B(5), and followed its earlier decisions on that basis. Where a refund is otherwise admissible on merits, it need not be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund merely because of unjust enrichment. The operative effect is that the claimant is entitled to the refund.

---

---

Issues: Whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies to refund claims arising on finalisation of provisional assessment under the customs law.

Analysis: The refund claim had been found admissible on merits but was denied on the ground of unjust enrichment and directed to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. The Tribunal followed its earlier decisions and the principle drawn from the Apex Court ruling on Rule 9B(5) of the Central Excise Rules, treating the provisions governing finalisation of provisional assessments under the Customs Act as parallel to that regime. On that basis, the doctrine of unjust enrichment was held not to govern refunds arising from finalisation of assessment.

Conclusion: The doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply to refunds arising from finalisation of provisional assessment, and the appellants were entitled to the refund.

---