https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47545 The Court dismissed the petition challenging the determination of Annual Production Capacity (APC) by the Central Excise Commissioner, which included galleries in the calculation. The petitioner sought a refund of excess duty paid, arguing violation of natural justice and reliance on legal precedents. However, the Court rejected the claim, citing delay in challenging the determination, lack of timely action, and failure to demonstrate justification for the delay. The Court emphasized the importance of acting within the limitation period and denied the petition, finding it time-barred and lacking reasonable cause for the delayed filing. en-us Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:23:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47545 The Court dismissed the petition challenging the determination of Annual Production Capacity (APC) by the Central Excise Commissioner, which included galleries in the calculation. The petitioner sought a refund of excess duty paid, arguing violation of natural justice and reliance on legal precedents. However, the Court rejected the claim, citing delay in challenging the determination, lack of timely action, and failure to demonstrate justification for the delay. The Court emphasized the importance of acting within the limitation period and denied the petition, finding it time-barred and lacking reasonable cause for the delayed filing. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47545