https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167331 An excess duty rebate granted under an exemption notification was treated as an erroneous refund of duty, not an advance deposit, because the record did not show any deposit mechanism and the rebate was granted after the relevant period of excess production. Recovery of such short-levied or erroneously refunded duty had to proceed under Section 11A, and the department could not bypass the statutory time limit by relying on a common law period of limitation. The revisionary order was therefore unsustainable and was set aside, with the assessee succeeding in the appeal. en-us Mon, 04 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:41:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167331 An excess duty rebate granted under an exemption notification was treated as an erroneous refund of duty, not an advance deposit, because the record did not show any deposit mechanism and the rebate was granted after the relevant period of excess production. Recovery of such short-levied or erroneously refunded duty had to proceed under Section 11A, and the department could not bypass the statutory time limit by relying on a common law period of limitation. The revisionary order was therefore unsustainable and was set aside, with the assessee succeeding in the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167331