https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234293 Annual production capacity determined under the special excise scheme was an administrative exercise based on declarations and verification, not a quasi-judicial order carrying an appellate right; the determination was therefore not appealable. Because that capacity determination was not required to be separately challenged, a refund claim under Section 11B for duty collected on an erroneous capacity basis could not be rejected solely on the ground that the capacity order had not been set aside. The exclusion of galleries from chamber computation was treated as settled law and the later explanation as clarificatory, so the refund claims remained maintainable and had to be reconsidered on the remaining objections. en-us Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Jun 2013 10:11:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234293 Annual production capacity determined under the special excise scheme was an administrative exercise based on declarations and verification, not a quasi-judicial order carrying an appellate right; the determination was therefore not appealable. Because that capacity determination was not required to be separately challenged, a refund claim under Section 11B for duty collected on an erroneous capacity basis could not be rejected solely on the ground that the capacity order had not been set aside. The exclusion of galleries from chamber computation was treated as settled law and the later explanation as clarificatory, so the refund claims remained maintainable and had to be reconsidered on the remaining objections. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234293