https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167227 A refund claim arising from a conditional exemption notification was held to fall outside Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 because entitlement to exemption could only be determined at the close of the financial year, so payment of duty at normal rates before that point was not payment made through inadvertence, error, or misconstruction. Once Rule 11 was found inapplicable, the departmental authorities had no jurisdiction to grant refund under that statutory machinery, and any relief had to be pursued elsewhere. The claim therefore failed before the excise authorities. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2014 11:07:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167227 A refund claim arising from a conditional exemption notification was held to fall outside Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 because entitlement to exemption could only be determined at the close of the financial year, so payment of duty at normal rates before that point was not payment made through inadvertence, error, or misconstruction. Once Rule 11 was found inapplicable, the departmental authorities had no jurisdiction to grant refund under that statutory machinery, and any relief had to be pursued elsewhere. The claim therefore failed before the excise authorities. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167227