Refund admissibility and unjust enrichment findings attained finality, so the Revenue's appeal was held not maintainable.

Refund admissibility could not be reopened at the Tribunal stage once the original authority's finding allowing the claim had attained finality because it was not challenged in the lower appellate proceedings. The lower appellate authority also found that unjust enrichment did not arise since the goods remained with the claimants, and the Revenue did not dispute that finding before the Tribunal. On these facts, the Revenue's appeals were held not maintainable and were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue's appeals were maintainable when the finding on admissibility of refund had become final and the finding on unjust enrichment was not challenged.

Analysis: The refund claim had already been held admissible by the original authority after considering the notification relied upon for the claim. That finding was not carried in appeal before the lower appellate authority and therefore attained finality. The lower appellate authority also recorded that unjust enrichment did not arise because the goods were still with the claimants, and the Revenue did not challenge that finding before the Tribunal. In these circumstances, the Revenue could not reopen the issue of refund admissibility at the Tribunal stage.

Conclusion: The appeals were not maintainable and were dismissed.

---