Direct refund of excess CST upheld where the purchaser bore the tax burden and unjust enrichment barred seller retention.

Where excess CST on inter-State diesel sales was collected because C forms had initially been refused, the later issuance of the C forms made the excess tax refundable. The Court held that refund could be granted directly to the purchaser because the tax burden had been borne by the purchaser and the seller could not retain the amount without attracting unjust enrichment. A routing objection through the seller was rejected, and the refund claim was to be processed on the purchaser's application within the stipulated time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the purchaser was entitled to refund of excess CST collected on inter-State sales of diesel after C forms were subsequently issued, and whether refund had to be routed only through the seller or could be granted directly to the purchaser.

Analysis: The Court found that the purchaser had borne the tax burden because the seller had collected tax at the higher rate only due to the earlier refusal of C forms by the Rajasthan authorities. Once the C forms were later issued, the excess tax stood refundable. The Court held that if refund were directed to the seller, the seller would not be entitled to retain it because the burden had already been passed on to the purchaser, and a claim by the seller would be hit by unjust enrichment. The Court also relied on the earlier Rajasthan High Court directions in the purchaser's own case and held that the refund claim had to be processed on the purchaser's application within the stipulated time.

Conclusion: The purchaser was entitled to direct refund of the excess tax, and the respondents were required to process the refund claim and grant the amount within twelve weeks.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, and the refund claim was directed to be processed in accordance with law in favour of the purchaser.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the ultimate burden of tax has been borne by the purchaser and the seller has already collected the amount from that purchaser, refund cannot be denied on a hyper-technical routing objection and must be granted to the person who actually bore the tax, subject to the principle of unjust enrichment.

---