Refund of excise duty on tea remanded for fresh adjudication after inadequate consideration of protest payment and unjust enrichment.

Refund of additional duty of excise on tea required fresh adjudication where the record suggested payment under protest and evidence that the duty burden had not been passed on to buyers. The appellate order was set aside because it did not adequately discuss the full facts or the relevant exemption background. The adjudicating authority was directed to reconsider the refund claim on the existing record and any further evidence produced, and to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order rejecting the refund claim and directing a fresh examination warranted interference and remand for proper adjudication.

Analysis: The refund arose from additional duty of excise on tea cleared by a bought leaf factory under exemption notifications governing the relevant periods. The record indicated that the duty had been paid under protest and that the invoices and original adjudication order had recorded that the duty burden had not been passed on to buyers. The appellate order was found to have been passed without adequate discussion of the complete facts and the relevant legal background, and the matter required reconsideration by the adjudicating authority on the evidence already on record as well as any further evidence to be produced.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh examination and decision in accordance with law, and the impugned order was set aside.

---