https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42757 The partnership firm contested the classification of its stainless steel product by the revenue authority, seeking classification as 'Patta/Patti' instead of sheet or strips. The correct classification was affirmed by the Tribunal, entitling the firm to a refund of excise duty paid under protest. The court emphasized the revenue's obligation to refund the amount collected erroneously and ordered interest at a rate of 12% per annum from the date of duty payment. The respondents were directed to refund the excise duty with interest within four months from the judgment date. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:02:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42757 The partnership firm contested the classification of its stainless steel product by the revenue authority, seeking classification as 'Patta/Patti' instead of sheet or strips. The correct classification was affirmed by the Tribunal, entitling the firm to a refund of excise duty paid under protest. The court emphasized the revenue's obligation to refund the amount collected erroneously and ordered interest at a rate of 12% per annum from the date of duty payment. The respondents were directed to refund the excise duty with interest within four months from the judgment date. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42757