Provisional assessment refunds escape unjust enrichment bar and remain payable with statutory interest.

Refunds arising directly from finalisation of provisional assessment are not subject to the bar of unjust enrichment applicable to independent refund claims, especially where the refund relates to a period before the relevant proviso came into force. The analysis followed the line of authority treating such refunds as adjustments under provisional assessment rather than separate refund claims, and noted that the departmental circular supported that view. The later challenge also failed because, once the earlier provisional-assessment order was upheld, the basis for to the refund disappeared. The refund remained payable with statutory interest.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether refund arising out of finalisation of provisional assessment was subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment. (ii) Whether the assessee's refund claim and the consequential appeal could be sustained once the earlier order on provisional assessment was upheld.

Issue (i): Whether refund arising out of finalisation of provisional assessment was subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The refund arose from finalisation of provisional assessment for a period prior to the amendment bringing the proviso into force. The governing principle was drawn from the line of authority holding that recoveries or refunds arising purely on adjustment under provisional assessment do not attract the bar of unjust enrichment or the procedural restrictions applicable to an independent refund claim. The later contrary views were treated as not governing this situation, and the departmental circular also recognised the same position for provisional assessment refunds.

Conclusion: The doctrine of unjust enrichment did not apply to the refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the assessee's refund claim and the consequential appeal could be sustained once the earlier order on provisional assessment was upheld.

Analysis: The later appeal was dependent on the outcome of the challenge to the earlier order. Once the earlier challenge failed, the basis for objecting to the refund claim disappeared. The refund order was therefore found to be consistent with the controlling law and with the departmental clarification, and the assessee was entitled to the refund with statutory interest.

Conclusion: The assessee's refund claim was sustained and the consequential appeal failed, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The legal position on refunds arising from finalisation of provisional assessment was affirmed, and the refund granted to the assessee remained intact.

Ratio Decidendi: Refunds that arise directly from finalisation of provisional assessment are not governed by the bar of unjust enrichment applicable to independent refund claims.

---