Judgment:
1. The only point to be considered in this case is whether the assessee can avail benefit of concessional rate of duty without claiming the same in the classification list. The Assistant Collector held that the assessee is not entitled to claim refund since it was not shown in the price list. The Collector (Appeals) observed that normally the assessees are expected to claim the exemption in the classification list. However, where they, by ignorance or inadvertance have not claimed the exemption, they have an alternate remedy under Section 11B of the Act by filing a refund claim. It is settled position now that the provisions of Section 11B are substantive in nature and also independent so long as the claim for refund of excise duty is made within six months. It is not the case of the department that refund claim is barred by time. The Tribunal has observed in the case of Rasan Detergents reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 95 following the earlier decision in the case of Tata Oil Mills reported at 1991 (53) E.L.T. 361 that "the lower authorities were not justified in rejecting the refund claim on the ground of the finality of the approval of the price lists and the payment of duty without protest. The view that there could not be a suo motto claim by an assessee is pointless. Where the assessee has a case that excess duty had been paid, for whatever reason, he would be entitled to take advantage of Section 11B of the Act and he is entitled to succeed if his claim is tenable." 2. In view of this, and in the facts and circumstances of this case, we do not find any substance in the appeal filed by the department.
Accordingly appeal is dismissed.