Unjust enrichment and provisional assessment refunds: court applied Section 11B principles and allowed the assessee's claim.

Refund claims arising from finalisation of provisional assessment were considered in light of the amended refund regime and the statutory doctrine of unjust enrichment. The Court followed binding precedent that such claims, when governed by the amended provisions, must satisfy the refund conditions under Section 11B, including unjust enrichment. Applying the later decision of the same Court on similar facts, it treated the refund as governed by the law applicable to finalisation of provisional assessment and the refund procedure under Section 11B. On that basis, unjust enrichment did not disentitle the assessee, and the refund claim succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment applies to a refund claim arising from finalisation of provisional assessment where the finalisation and refund claim occurred after the statutory amendments governing such refunds.

Analysis: The refund arose on finalisation of provisional assessment and the Court followed binding precedent holding that, where the refund claim is governed by the amended refund regime, the claim must satisfy the statutory requirements relating to refund and unjust enrichment. On the facts, the Court declined to follow the contrary view urged by the Revenue and applied the later decision of this Court which treated similar refund claims as governed by the law applicable to finalisation of provisional assessment and the refund procedure under Section 11B.

Conclusion: The doctrine of unjust enrichment did not disentitle the assessee in the present case, and the assessee succeeded on the issue.

---