SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 497

N. S. HEGDE, S. P. BHARUCHA, SHIVARAJ V. PATIL
Sinkhai Synthetics And Chemicals Private LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Collector Of Central Excise, Aurangabad – Respondent


(1) THE assessees claimed the benefit of an exemption notification. The revenue challenged the claim. The matters went higher and upto the customs, excise and gold (control) appellate tribunal, which decided in favour of the assessees. In the interregnum, the assessees paid the excise duty under protest. Upon the appeals before the tribunal being decided in their favour, on 17/01/1991, the assessees claimed repayment of the amount of duty paid by them under protest.

(2) IN September, 1991 the provisions of section 11-B were amended, and it now reads :

"11 B. Claim for refund of duty. - (1) Any person claiming refund of any duty of excise may make an application for refund of such duty to the assistant commissioner of central excise before the expiry of six months from the relevant date in such form and manner as may be prescribed and the application shall be accompanied by such documentary or other evidence including the documents referred to in section 12A as the applicant may furnish to establish that the amount of duty of excise, in relation to which such refund is claimed was collected from, or paid by him and the incidence of such duty had not been passed
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top