https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40562 The court upheld the petitioner's interpretation of Notification No. 146/74-Central Excises, ruling that the average production for rebate eligibility should be calculated based on all five preceding years, even if some years had no production during specific months. The court found the petitioner's calculation method and interpretation of the Notification to be correct, directing the respondents to grant the rebate claim of Rs. 6,59,104. The court deemed the writ petition under Article 226 maintainable due to the absence of a formal decision or order by a Central Excise Officer, issuing a writ of mandamus in favor of the petitioner without awarding costs. en-us Sat, 19 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 May 2010 15:40:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40562 The court upheld the petitioner's interpretation of Notification No. 146/74-Central Excises, ruling that the average production for rebate eligibility should be calculated based on all five preceding years, even if some years had no production during specific months. The court found the petitioner's calculation method and interpretation of the Notification to be correct, directing the respondents to grant the rebate claim of Rs. 6,59,104. The court deemed the writ petition under Article 226 maintainable due to the absence of a formal decision or order by a Central Excise Officer, issuing a writ of mandamus in favor of the petitioner without awarding costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 19 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40562