Unjust enrichment in customs refunds requires corroborative records; a Chartered Accountant's certificate alone is not enough.

In a customs refund claim, the claimant must affirmatively prove that the duty burden was not passed on to another person. A Chartered Accountant's certificate, even if based on verification of records, is insufficient by itself unless supported by documentary evidence such as sale bills, cost sheets, and related records. Because the supporting material was not produced, the burden of proving absence of unjust enrichment was not discharged, and the refund was directed to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred from cash payment and was required to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund on the ground that the incidence of duty had been passed on, and whether a Chartered Accountant's certificate by itself was sufficient to prove that the duty burden had not been passed on.

Analysis: The refund was admissible on merits, but the key question was whether the claimant had established that the duty incidence was borne by it alone. The documentary record was not produced to corroborate the Chartered Accountant's certificate. In a refund claim, especially where the certificate is based on verification of records, supporting material such as sale bills, cost sheets, and other surrounding documents is necessary to show that the burden was not passed on to any other person. The certificate, standing alone, was not enough to discharge that burden.

Conclusion: The Chartered Accountant's certificate was insufficient to prove absence of unjust enrichment, and the refund was rightly directed to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.

Ratio Decidendi: In a customs refund claim, the claimant must affirmatively prove that the duty burden has not been passed on, and a Chartered Accountant's certificate without corroborative documentary evidence is insufficient to discharge that burden.

---