Retrospective excise exemption covered by later notification, with refund relief still subject to unjust enrichment.

Retrospective excise exemption under the Central Duties of Excise (Retrospective Exemption) Act, 1986 was treated as covering a later notification that restored the earlier exemption position for motor vehicle parts used as original equipment in tractor manufacture. On that basis, the refund claim was held sustainable on merits and the earlier contrary view was not accepted. The refund relief, however, remained subject to examination under the doctrine of unjust enrichment, so monetary restitution could not be granted without that separate verification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim based on retrospective exemption under the Central Duties of Excise (Retrospective Exemption) Act, 1986 was sustainable in respect of motor vehicle parts used as original equipment parts in the manufacture of tractors, and whether the refund was nevertheless subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Analysis: The goods in question were used in further manufacture of excisable goods, and the manufactured goods were used as original equipment parts. The exemption position that existed before introduction of the new tariff had, in substance, continued under the later notification issued with retrospective effect. On that basis, the earlier view that the successor notification was not covered by the retrospective exemption enactment was not accepted. The refund aspect was also noted to be governed by the law relating to unjust enrichment.

Conclusion: The refund claim was held allowable on merits, and the impugned order was set aside, subject to the refund being examined under the doctrine of unjust enrichment.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded on the substantive refund issue, with the monetary relief remaining subject to the bar of unjust enrichment.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a later excise exemption notification restores, with retrospective effect, the same exemption position that prevailed under the earlier regime, the benefit is to be treated as covered by the retrospective exemption enactment, while any refund granted remains subject to unjust enrichment.

---