Unjust enrichment bars customs duty refund where export proceeds exceed declared FOB value and passing on is unproven.

Refund of customs duty in reassessed shipping bill cases remains subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, and the claimant must prove that the duty burden was not passed on. Where the Bank Realisation Certificate shows export proceeds higher than the FOB value declared in the shipping bill, the excess realisation invites scrutiny on whether the duty incidence was absorbed by the exporter or shifted elsewhere. A chartered accountant's certificate that does not explain the difference is insufficient, and absent cogent material rebutting passing on of the burden, the refund is barred by unjust enrichment and not admissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund of customs duty was barred by the doctrine of unjust enrichment on the ground that the exporter realised export proceeds higher than the FOB value declared in the shipping bill.

Analysis: The refund was claimed after reassessment of the shipping bill, but the Bank Realisation Certificate showed realisation in excess of the declared FOB value. The excess realisation was not satisfactorily explained, the chartered accountant's certificate did not address the reason for the difference, and no cogent material was produced to establish that the duty incidence had not been passed on. In refund matters, the claimant must establish that the burden of duty has not been passed on, and a higher realisation than declared value justifies scrutiny of unjust enrichment under the statutory refund framework.

Conclusion: The refund was rightly held to be hit by unjust enrichment and was not admissible to the appellant.

---