2018 (5) TMI 895 - AT - Customs

Refund claim - finalisation of provisional assessments - unjust enrichment - Held that - Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Zinc Limited 2009 (2) TMI 100 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment will not apply to the provisional assessment ordered prior to 13.07.2006 and any refund arising out of such provisional assessment being finalised subsequently, has to be refunded to the importers - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Rejection of refund claims arising from finalization of provisional assessments
- Doctrine of unjust enrichment in refund cases

Analysis:

Issue 1: Rejection of refund claims arising from finalization of provisional assessments
The appeal was against the rejection of refund claims amounting to ?13,98,120 arising from finalization of provisional assessments. The appellant had imported goods and filed a bill of entry which was provisionally assessed pending submission of final documents. The authorities enhanced the value of the goods but included insurance costs. The first appellate authority remanded the matter back for finalization and consideration of unjust enrichment. The appellant filed for a refund, which was sanctioned but ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund due to unjust enrichment. The appellant argued that the refund arose before the amendment requiring satisfaction of unjust enrichment. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument, citing a Gujarat High Court judgment that unjust enrichment does not apply to provisional assessments ordered before 13.07.2006. The Tribunal held that the lower authorities' orders were unsustainable and allowed the appeal.

Issue 2: Doctrine of unjust enrichment in refund cases
The issue of the doctrine of unjust enrichment in refund cases was central to the appeal. The Tribunal considered the timing of the finalization of provisional assessments and the applicability of the doctrine. Citing various judgments, including a Gujarat High Court decision and a Tribunal ruling, it held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply to provisional assessments ordered before 13.07.2006. Therefore, any refund arising from such assessments should be granted to the importers. The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and allowed the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the non-applicability of unjust enrichment in this context.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment in this case clarified the application of the doctrine of unjust enrichment in refund cases arising from finalization of provisional assessments, providing a favorable ruling for the appellant based on legal precedents and statutory provisions.