https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41300 Refund became due under appellate orders, the excise officer had a statutory duty to give effect to it without insisting on a fresh claim, and that duty could be withheld only if a stay or other legal impediment existed; pending revision proceedings alone did not justify non-payment. The Government's revisional show-cause notice was also examined under Section 36(2): a price-list approval order was treated as distinct from an assessment, levy, short levy, or erroneous refund, so the special limitation for such duty demands did not apply. The notice was therefore within the applicable limitation and not shown to be without jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 25 Feb 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Jun 2010 18:24:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41300 Refund became due under appellate orders, the excise officer had a statutory duty to give effect to it without insisting on a fresh claim, and that duty could be withheld only if a stay or other legal impediment existed; pending revision proceedings alone did not justify non-payment. The Government's revisional show-cause notice was also examined under Section 36(2): a price-list approval order was treated as distinct from an assessment, levy, short levy, or erroneous refund, so the special limitation for such duty demands did not apply. The notice was therefore within the applicable limitation and not shown to be without jurisdiction. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Feb 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41300