https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41555 Excise refund relief was refused because the claimant had not first established before the competent excise authority that the goods used were essences rather than blended flavouring concentrates, and the writ court declined to decide that factual issue itself. The refund claim was also held time-barred under the six-month limitation then applicable, and the statutory appellate remedy against rejection of refund had not been exhausted. The Court further noted that the duty burden had been passed on to consumers, undermining any equitable basis for refund. Relief by way of refund and declaration was therefore declined on both merits and procedural grounds. en-us Tue, 06 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:34:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41555 Excise refund relief was refused because the claimant had not first established before the competent excise authority that the goods used were essences rather than blended flavouring concentrates, and the writ court declined to decide that factual issue itself. The refund claim was also held time-barred under the six-month limitation then applicable, and the statutory appellate remedy against rejection of refund had not been exhausted. The Court further noted that the duty burden had been passed on to consumers, undermining any equitable basis for refund. Relief by way of refund and declaration was therefore declined on both merits and procedural grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41555