https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40880 The court concluded that the petitioners were entitled to a refund of the excise duty collected on maida. The Finance Act did not include the provision for excise duty on maida, and a subsequent notification exempted maida from such duty. Therefore, the provisional collection of excise duty was unauthorized under the final enactment. The court allowed the writ petition, making the rule nisi absolute and directing the Union of India to refund Rs. 32,004 to the petitioners. Costs were awarded, with the advocate's fee set at Rs. 250. en-us Tue, 16 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 May 2010 14:23:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40880 The court concluded that the petitioners were entitled to a refund of the excise duty collected on maida. The Finance Act did not include the provision for excise duty on maida, and a subsequent notification exempted maida from such duty. Therefore, the provisional collection of excise duty was unauthorized under the final enactment. The court allowed the writ petition, making the rule nisi absolute and directing the Union of India to refund Rs. 32,004 to the petitioners. Costs were awarded, with the advocate's fee set at Rs. 250. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 16 Sep 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40880