https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765190 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed appellant's refund claim for excise duty paid under protest. The tribunal held that fabricating transmission towers did not constitute manufacture, making the duty collection illegal. Since tax was collected under mistake of law, time limitation under Section 11B did not apply. The tribunal ruled that endorsement "under protest" on gate passes was sufficient despite non-compliance with Rule 233B format requirements. Retaining illegally collected amounts violates Article 265 of the Constitution. The department was directed to release refund with 12% annual interest from rejection date. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765190 CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed appellant's refund claim for excise duty paid under protest. The tribunal held that fabricating transmission towers did not constitute manufacture, making the duty collection illegal. Since tax was collected under mistake of law, time limitation under Section 11B did not apply. The tribunal ruled that endorsement "under protest" on gate passes was sufficient despite non-compliance with Rule 233B format requirements. Retaining illegally collected amounts violates Article 265 of the Constitution. The department was directed to release refund with 12% annual interest from rejection date. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765190