https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40597 Refund claims under exemption and relief notifications issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be rejected on the basis of a press note or an administrative assumption that the duty relief had to be passed on to consumers. In the absence of any such condition in the statutory notification, administrative guidance could not curtail the relief granted by the notification or govern the quasi-judicial determination of refund entitlement. The separate valuation argument under Section 4(4)(d)(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 did not change the position, because the issue was the admissibility of statutory relief, not valuation-based passing on of duty incidence. en-us Thu, 02 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 May 2010 17:05:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40597 Refund claims under exemption and relief notifications issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be rejected on the basis of a press note or an administrative assumption that the duty relief had to be passed on to consumers. In the absence of any such condition in the statutory notification, administrative guidance could not curtail the relief granted by the notification or govern the quasi-judicial determination of refund entitlement. The separate valuation argument under Section 4(4)(d)(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 did not change the position, because the issue was the admissibility of statutory relief, not valuation-based passing on of duty incidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40597