1998 (7) TMI 691

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mathew Nellimoottil, A.C.G.S.C., for the Respondent. JUDGMENT In both these Original Petitions, the Kerala State Electricity Board is seeking for a direction to refund the amount paid by them as excise duty. 2. Petitioners' appeal before the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal was allowed holding that they are not manufacturers and setting aside the orders of the Collect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In the above circumstances, they filed this Original petition for a direction to refund the amount. 4. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) = 1997 (5) S.C.C. 536] has taken the view that the relief for refund on the basis of misinterpretation or misapplying the provisions of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... adjudicated only under the provisions of the respective enactments. No suit for refund of duty is maintainable in that behalf. The writ petition would naturally be considered and disposed of in the light of and in accordance with the provisions of Section 11B. under Clause (xi) their Lordships observed that Section 11B applies to all pending proceedings. Ultimately, their Lordships in paragraph 1....