Refund under CST cannot be denied on local registration objections where the tax burden was ultimately borne by the claimant.

Refund of tax collected under the CST regime was upheld where the claimant had ultimately borne the tax burden and produced the relevant C Forms. The objection that refund was unavailable because the dealer lacked Gujarat registration was rejected as hypertechnical, since earlier High Court precedent had already favoured such refund and the Supreme Court had not disturbed that position. The principle of unjust enrichment did not apply because the claimant was treated as the ultimate consumer. On that basis, the refund claim was recognised as maintainable and the authorities were required to process and pay the refund.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of the tax amount collected under the CST regime on the strength of C Forms, and whether the objections based on absence of Gujarat registration and the interim character of the Bombay High Court order could defeat the refund claim.

Analysis: The refund claim was examined in the light of the fact that the petitioner had ultimately borne the tax burden and had produced the C Forms issued pursuant to the Bombay High Court order. The objection that refund could be granted only to a dealer registered in Gujarat was held untenable in view of the earlier pronouncement of the same High Court and the refusal of the Supreme Court to interfere, while keeping the interpretation of Section 36 of the Gujarat VAT Act, 2003 open for an appropriate case. The Court treated the stance of the respondents as hypertechnical and noted that the petitioner, being the ultimate consumer, was not hit by the principle of unjust enrichment.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to refund of the tax amount collected from it under the CST Act, and the respondents were directed to process and pay the refund.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the tax burden has been ultimately borne by the claimant and the entitlement to refund is supported by the relevant C Forms, a refund cannot be denied on a hypertechnical objection such as lack of local registration when unjust enrichment does not arise.

---