https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72986 The claim for customs exemption was examined on the wrong footing, because the lower authority proceeded as if Notification No. 80/70-Customs governed the request, although that was not the true basis of the refund claim. The appellant maintained that Notification No. 281/76-Customs, as amended, was the relevant concession and had not been applied to the facts. As the dispute had been dealt with under an inapplicable notification, the matter required reconsideration by the original adjudicating authority. The matter was remitted to the Assistant Collector for fresh adjudication on the claim under Notification No. 281/76-Customs as amended. en-us Wed, 27 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 May 2011 13:15:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72986 The claim for customs exemption was examined on the wrong footing, because the lower authority proceeded as if Notification No. 80/70-Customs governed the request, although that was not the true basis of the refund claim. The appellant maintained that Notification No. 281/76-Customs, as amended, was the relevant concession and had not been applied to the facts. As the dispute had been dealt with under an inapplicable notification, the matter required reconsideration by the original adjudicating authority. The matter was remitted to the Assistant Collector for fresh adjudication on the claim under Notification No. 281/76-Customs as amended. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72986