ORDER
Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. The appellant made two claims for refund of excise duty paid by it on goods manufactured and cleared by it on the ground that they were exempted from payment of duty by Notification 347/86. This notifica tion exempts from duty goods used as stores on board a ship of the Navy. The claims were rejected on the ground that when the goods were cleared from the factory the appellant did not specify in the classification list that the benefit of the notification would be claimed. This rejection by the Assistant Collector having been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the matter is before the Tribunal.
2. The two authorities do not dispute that the benefit of notification would be available. The only reason for rejection is that the claim for the ex emption was not made prior to clearance of the goods. If this is a valid reason for denial of the claim the provision of Section 11B of the Act would be con fined to cases where excess payment of duty is made purely only by arith metical mistake. It is settled law a claim for exemption can be made at any stage. The denial of the claims on this basis is therefore wrong.
3. The appeals are allowed and the impugned order set aside. Pay ment of refund to the appellant, however, will be subject to its establishing that the conditions contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 11B of the Act have been complied with.
