Compounded levy refund depends on notification timing and commencement of production; refund allowed only for the later week.

Under the compounded levy procedure, duty already discharged in advance for 22-12-1975 to 31-12-1975 was not affected by Notification No. 240/75 dated 29-12-1975, so refund was not available for that period. For 1-1-1976 to 7-1-1976, the notification in force from 29-12-1975 applied, and the statutory return and account records supported the claim; on the evidence, the centrifugal had commenced only on 8-1-1976, so no duty was payable for that week and refund was admissible to that extent.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of duty was payable for the periods 22-12-1975 to 31-12-1975 and 1-1-1976 to 7-1-1976 under the compounded levy procedure in view of Notification No. 240/75 dated 29-12-1975.

Analysis: The duty for the period 22-12-1975 to 31-12-1975 had already been discharged under the compounded levy system, which required advance payment before the relevant week commenced, and the later notification did not affect that period. For the week 1-1-1976 to 7-1-1976, the notification effective from 29-12-1975 applied. The statutory records maintained under the prescribed return and account requirements supported the claim, and there was no finding that those requirements were not complied with. On the evidence, the centrifugal had commenced only on 8-1-1976, so no duty was payable for that week.

Conclusion: Refund was not admissible for 22-12-1975 to 31-12-1975, but was admissible for 1-1-1976 to 7-1-1976; the assessee succeeded only to that extent.

---