PRADYOT KUMAR BANERJEE,C.J. - (1.)THIS rule is directed against an order made by the Assistant Collector, Customs and Central Excise Jodhpur, affirmed by the Appellate Officer and thereafter by the Central Government. All of them held that the application having been made beyond the period of limitation, the application cannot be entertained. Being aggrieved by the said order the petitioner moved this Court to obtain the present rule.
(2.)IN a short compass the facts are that the petitioner wrote to the Departmental Authorities whether he is liable to pay excise duty if he manufactures the products from steel ingots or out of cut or broken steel ingots which according to him, by Notification No. 206/63, dated 30th November 1963, amended by notification of 1965, is free from excise duty. '
In reply to the said letter the petitioner was given to understand that he must pay the excise duty and that the notification does not hold good It appears, it has been held by the Allahabad High Court in Bansal Steelsons Co. v. Union of India -(1974) Tax LR 2439 that the excise duty is not payable on such matters. Thereafter, the petitioner came to know of the mistake committed by him in paying this excise duty till 18th January 1973. He applied to the Department for refund of the money and they held inter alia that under Rule 11 read with Rule 173J of the Central Excise Rules the application is barred by limitation and therefore, was rejected It appears, in the said judgment it was stated that the petitioner neither made any protest nor any representation during the period and the assessment was done on the final basis. This statement is not correct on fact. On the other hand, even before the manufacture was made from the ingots, the petitioner wrote to the Excise Department to know whether this is free from excise duty and they wrote back to say that it will not be free and thereafter the petitioner went on paying and the payment which was made and which is the matter in dispute, was from August 27, 1971 to December 31, 1971, amounting to Rs. 12,488.15 p. Against this judgment the petitioner preferred an appeal. The appeal was dismissed and the revisional application was also dismissed. Being aggrieved, the petitioner moved this Court to obtain the present rule.

(3.)THIS rule was issued on July 4, 1977. The fact which is not in dispute is that the Government accepted the interpretation of the Allahabad High Court that the manufacture of such things from ingots is not liable to excise duty.