Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether payment of normal duty on some consignments and subsequent payment of differential duty and interest amounted to opting out of the exemption notification, thereby disentitling the assessee to refund of the excess duty paid.
Analysis: The assessee had already availed the exemption notification and was entitled to the concessional rate of duty. The isolated payment of normal duty on some consignments did not amount to a withdrawal from the notification. The facts showed that, after the discrepancy was pointed out, the assessee paid the differential duty and interest, but that conduct did not confer any advantage inconsistent with the notification, nor did it show an election to abandon the exemption. The doctrine of estoppel had no application where the assessee had paid more than what was legally due and claimed refund of the excess. The cited decision on withdrawal from exemption during the financial year was distinguishable on facts.
Conclusion: Mere payment of normal duty on some consignments, and payment of differential duty and interest on demand, did not amount to opting out of the exemption notification. The assessee remained entitled to the refund, and the appeal failed.
Final Conclusion: The judgment affirms that an assessee does not lose the benefit of an exemption notification merely because excess duty was paid on certain clearances, so long as there was no real withdrawal from the notified concession.
Ratio Decidendi: Payment of duty in excess of the concessional rate on some consignments, without a conscious withdrawal from the exemption scheme, does not forfeit the right to claim refund of the excess paid.