Binding revisional refund orders cannot be resisted at implementation stage by fresh objections or limitation pleas.

A revisional order directing consequential relief in a refund matter was treated as an order of refund, and the revenue was bound to implement it. Objections that the duty had been collected on crude aluminium rather than properzi rods could not be re-agitated at the implementation stage because they were matters that should have been raised in revision. The limitation plea under Rule 11 of the Central Excises and Salt Rules was also unavailable against an order already directing refund. The levy controversy was not reopened independently, as the revisional order concluded the matter.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of excise duty pursuant to the revisional order, and whether the respondents could resist implementation by disputing the nature of the duty collected or by invoking limitation under Rule 11 of the Central Excises and Salt Rules.

Analysis: The revisional order expressly allowed the revision and directed that consequential relief be granted. Read with the refund application and the revision petition, the order was construed as an order of refund. At the stage of implementation, it was not open to the respondents to re-agitate objections that ought to have been raised in revision, including the contention that the duty was collected on crude aluminium rather than on properzi rods. The plea based on limitation under Rule 11 was also held unavailable against an order already directing refund. The Court therefore declined to examine the merits of the levy controversy independently, as the revisional order concluded the matter.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to refund, and the respondents were bound to implement the revisional order without raising the objections of mischaracterization of duty or limitation.

Final Conclusion: The decision enforces the binding effect of the revisional refund order and bars the revenue from resisting compliance on grounds that were open at the earlier stage.

Ratio Decidendi: A revisional order directing consequential relief in a refund matter is binding at the implementation stage, and the revenue cannot defeat it by raising fresh objections or limitation under refund rules.

---