Unjust enrichment in excise refunds applies only to pending claims, not refund orders already final before amendment.

The amended Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, introducing the unjust enrichment bar on refunds, applied only to pending or future claims and not to refund orders that had already attained finality before 20 September 1991. A statutory amendment cannot reopen a refund decision finally allowed before the amendment took effect, and clear taxing language cannot be overridden by equity. Refund matters already concluded before the amendment therefore remained outside its reach, while only claims still pending on the amendment date were governed by the amended provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amended Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to refund claims where the refund order had already been passed and had become final before the 1991 amendment, but actual payment was still pending.

Analysis: The amendment introduced the requirement that refund be denied where the incidence of duty had been passed on, thereby embodying the principle of unjust enrichment. The controlling principle applied was that a statutory amendment governing refund cannot reopen matters that had already been finally concluded before the amendment came into force. Refund applications that had been finally allowed by the appellate authority before 20 September 1991 were not pending proceedings, and the amended provision could not be given retrospective effect to unsettle such final orders. In interpreting the taxing statute, the Court also applied the rule that equity cannot override clear statutory language.

Conclusion: The amended Section 11B did not apply to refund orders that had become final before the 1991 amendment. The answer to the referred question was in the negative, in favour of the assessee and against the Department.

Final Conclusion: Only refund matters still pending on the date of the amendment were governed by the amended provision, while refund orders already finally concluded remained outside its reach.

Ratio Decidendi: An amending provision introducing unjust enrichment in refund law operates only on pending or future refund claims and cannot reopen refund orders that had already attained finality before the amendment.

---