https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52156 After the 1991 amendment to Section 11B, a buyer who has borne excise duty and has not passed on the incidence may maintain a refund claim, because the provision contemplates refund claims by persons other than the manufacturer, including reference to the buyer's date of purchase. Refund under Notification No. 78/90 was also held not to be barred merely because the manufacturer did not claim the exemption at clearance or obtain the prescribed certificate earlier, so long as the statutory conditions were otherwise satisfied. On that basis, the buyer's refund claim was maintainable and the departmental appeal failed by majority. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Oct 2010 16:28:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52156 After the 1991 amendment to Section 11B, a buyer who has borne excise duty and has not passed on the incidence may maintain a refund claim, because the provision contemplates refund claims by persons other than the manufacturer, including reference to the buyer's date of purchase. Refund under Notification No. 78/90 was also held not to be barred merely because the manufacturer did not claim the exemption at clearance or obtain the prescribed certificate earlier, so long as the statutory conditions were otherwise satisfied. On that basis, the buyer's refund claim was maintainable and the departmental appeal failed by majority. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52156