https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42204 A tax classification dispute over excise duty on poster paper led the Court to direct the competent authority to investigate the petitioner's revised classification list claim and dispose of it within three months. The Court did not decide the underlying duty liability on merits, including the asserted shift in classification after exclusion from Item 17 and the claimed liability under Item 68. Because no refund application was pending in this matter, the direction was confined to examination of the revised classification list rather than consequential refund relief. The proceeding thus ended with an administrative direction to consider the classification claim, leaving the substantive excise issue unanswered. en-us Mon, 27 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:27:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42204 A tax classification dispute over excise duty on poster paper led the Court to direct the competent authority to investigate the petitioner's revised classification list claim and dispose of it within three months. The Court did not decide the underlying duty liability on merits, including the asserted shift in classification after exclusion from Item 17 and the claimed liability under Item 68. Because no refund application was pending in this matter, the direction was confined to examination of the revised classification list rather than consequential refund relief. The proceeding thus ended with an administrative direction to consider the classification claim, leaving the substantive excise issue unanswered. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42204