Refund claim in defective form and unjust enrichment verification upheld on supporting credit notes and consumer payment details.

A refund letter can be treated as a valid refund claim even if it is not filed in the prescribed proforma, where excess excise duty was paid and the request clearly sought refund; the defect in form did not defeat the claim. Verification of unjust enrichment through credit notes and consumer payment details was also found justified, because the appellate authority had directed the Revenue to check the supporting material. The refund-related order was therefore sustained and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a letter seeking refund could be treated as a refund claim despite not being filed in the prescribed proforma; and (ii) whether the direction to verify unjust enrichment through credit notes and consumer payment details was justified.

Issue (i): whether a letter seeking refund could be treated as a refund claim despite not being filed in the prescribed proforma.

Analysis: The claim related to excess excise duty paid after the duty on diesel generating sets had been reduced. The assessee had paid duty at the higher rate and sought refund, though the request was not in the prescribed form. In the circumstances, the claim was treated as a refund claim in the interest of justice.

Conclusion: The refund request was rightly treated as a refund claim notwithstanding the defective proforma, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether the direction to verify unjust enrichment through credit notes and consumer payment details was justified.

Analysis: The appellate authority had noted that credit notes had been issued with details of cheques issued to consumers and had directed the Revenue to verify them. That direction was considered fair and raised no sustainable grievance for the Revenue.

Conclusion: The verification direction on unjust enrichment was upheld, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge failed and the refund-related order of the appellate authority was sustained.

---