https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360041 Refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment for the pre-amendment period was treated as distinct from a refund claim under Section 11B, so the amended proviso to Rule 9B(5) could not be applied retrospectively. Because the assessment period was 1998-99 and the proviso came into force only on 25.06.1999, the doctrine of unjust enrichment could not be imported to deny the refund. The refund was therefore held admissible to the assessee, and the bar of unjust enrichment did not apply. en-us Thu, 03 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360041 Refund arising from finalisation of provisional assessment for the pre-amendment period was treated as distinct from a refund claim under Section 11B, so the amended proviso to Rule 9B(5) could not be applied retrospectively. Because the assessment period was 1998-99 and the proviso came into force only on 25.06.1999, the doctrine of unjust enrichment could not be imported to deny the refund. The refund was therefore held admissible to the assessee, and the bar of unjust enrichment did not apply. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360041