Unjust enrichment and SAD refund: revised accounts filed with tax authorities can prove duty incidence was not passed on.

Refund of Special Additional Duty could not be denied on unjust enrichment merely because the original balance sheet did not show the amount as receivable. Revised balance sheets filed with the income tax authorities reflected the refund as receivable and were accompanied by additional income tax paid on that basis, which credibly showed that the incidence of duty had not been passed on. The matter was distinguished from cases resting only on a Chartered Accountant's certificate without supporting records, and the refund procedure under Circular No. 6/08-Cus dated 28.12.2008 supported consideration of such evidence. The refund claim was therefore held admissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of Special Additional Duty could be denied on the ground of unjust enrichment merely because the original balance sheet did not show the amount as receivable and the revised balance sheet was filed later.

Analysis: The revised balance sheets were filed with the income tax authorities and reflected the refund amount as receivable, along with payment of additional income tax on that basis. This supported the conclusion that the incidence of duty had not been passed on. The case was distinguishable from a matter where only a Chartered Accountant's certificate was produced without supporting evidence. The refund procedure under Circular No. 6/08-Cus dated 28.12.2008 also supported consideration of such evidence.

Conclusion: The objection based on unjust enrichment was rejected and the refund claim was held to be admissible.

Ratio Decidendi: Where revised financial statements filed with the income tax authorities credibly show the refund amount as receivable and support non-passing of duty incidence, refund cannot be denied merely because the original balance sheet did not reflect that entry.

---