Refund claim for unavailed exemption cannot be rejected solely because duty was paid without claiming the notification initially.

An assessee cannot be denied exemption and refund merely because Notification No. 80/80 was not claimed in the classification list at the time of clearance. Payment of duty despite the availability of exemption does not, by itself, defeat a refund claim; the omission is not sufficient to bar consideration on merits. The governing principle applied is that money paid by mistake cannot be retained simply because it was paid voluntarily, and an assessee is not precluded from seeking refund where the duty was paid without initially availing the exemption.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee could be denied the benefit of Notification No. 80/80 and refund of duty merely because it had not claimed the notification in the classification list and had paid duty at the time of clearance.

Analysis: The duty had been paid despite the availability of the exemption under Notification No. 80/80. The omission to claim the notification at the time of clearance was not held sufficient by itself to defeat the claim for refund. Reliance was placed on the principle that money paid by mistake cannot be retained merely because it was paid voluntarily, and that an assessee is not barred from seeking refund simply because duty was paid without availing the exemption initially.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to have its claim considered on merits and could not be denied the benefit of Notification No. 80/80 solely on the ground that the exemption had not been claimed earlier.

---