https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95721 Excess central excise duty allegedly paid because the assessable value was inflated could not be adjusted as of right without first pursuing a refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944; that aspect was upheld. On the last invoice, the demand failed because the invoice related to clearance of the basic machinery, not the spare parts on which differential duty had been computed, so the duty demand on that invoice was deleted. Since the underlying demand did not survive to that extent, the penalty was also set aside. The remaining differential duty was sustained. en-us Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:21:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95721 Excess central excise duty allegedly paid because the assessable value was inflated could not be adjusted as of right without first pursuing a refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944; that aspect was upheld. On the last invoice, the demand failed because the invoice related to clearance of the basic machinery, not the spare parts on which differential duty had been computed, so the duty demand on that invoice was deleted. Since the underlying demand did not survive to that extent, the penalty was also set aside. The remaining differential duty was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95721