Refund claims for excise duty must adhere to the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, and proper civil proceedings or a regular suit should be pursued to establish the case.

The petitioner paid Central Excise Duty for 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1979-80. On the advice of their auditors they filed an application before the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Madras-18 for refund of a sum of Rs. 11, 181-24 p. stating that the above sum reflects the excise duty which had been erroneously paid by them on post-manufacturing expenses. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice as to why their claim should not be rejected as time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The petitioner sent an explanation and the same was rejected. Thereafter, the respondent, by the impugned order dated 16-11-1982, rejected the claim on the ground that the refund claim had been preferred beyond the time prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The prayer in the writ petition is for the issue of acertiorarified mandamusto quash the said order dated 16-11-1982 and to direct the respondent to pass orders granting refund of the excise duty collected from them, what they would call as post-manufacturing expenses.

2.The Assistant Collector of Central Excise is a statutory functionary. He is bound by the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, including Section 11B. If an application for refund claim is barred by limitation under Section 11B, he is entitled to reject the same. That is what the respondent has exactly done in this case. If the petitioner were of the opinion that there was no liability to pay central excise on certain portions of manufacturing expenses, described by them as post-manufacturing expenses, it is for them to establish their case by instituting proper civil proceedings for refund of the amount. Unless the question of liability or otherwise of the petitioner for payment of excise duty on that portion of the cost referable to post-manufacturing expenses is adjudicated, the claim for refund cannot be ordered. That would depend upon the result of the disputed question of fact. The proper remedy for the petitioner is to file a regular suit. Reserving that liberty to the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.