Refund under excise law cannot be ordered before appellate outcome and statutory scrutiny of entitlement.

Refund of excise duty differential could not be ordered straightaway while the departmental appeal remained pending, because entitlement to refund depended on the result of the appellate proceedings and, if relevant, scrutiny under the statutory refund scheme. A writ court should not bypass the refund mechanism by directing immediate payment without first examining whether the claim satisfied Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The question of refund was therefore premature, and any interest would arise only in accordance with the applicable refund provisions. The direction for immediate refund was held unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ court could straightaway direct refund of excise duty differential amount while the departmental appeal was pending, without first examining entitlement under the statutory refund scheme.

Analysis: The entitlement to refund depended upon the outcome of the pending appellate proceedings before the Tribunal. Even if the appeal failed, refund could not be ordered automatically without scrutiny under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The question of refund was therefore premature and had to await the appellate decision and, if necessary, consideration under the statutory refund provisions. Interest, if any, would also arise only in accordance with the scheme governing refundable duty amounts.

Conclusion: The direction for immediate refund was not sustainable. The issue was answered in favour of Revenue and against the assessee.

---