Just a moment...
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 a purchaser who is not the manufacturer of the excisable goods has locus standi to claim refund of duty allegedly paid under mistake of law to the Government.
Analysis: Duty under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is levied on goods produced or manufactured in India, and the scheme of collection under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 contemplates collection from the manufacturer or producer. If duty is paid in excess, the person entitled to seek refund is the person who paid the duty. Section 11A similarly proceeds against the manufacturer for short payment, and Section 11B, though using the expression 'any person', cannot be read to include a consumer who did not pay duty to the Government. The proper remedy, if any, lies against the manufacturers from whom the goods were purchased.
Conclusion: The purchaser had no locus standi to claim refund from the Government, and the refund claim was rightly rejected.