2003 (8) TMI 42 - SUPREME COURT

Application for refund claim - Held that:- . Merely because the departmental authorities took a long time to process the application for refund, the right of the appellant does not get defeated by the subsequent amendment made in sub-rule (5) of Rule 9B. The Commissioner of Central Excise and the CEGAT were, therefore, justified in holding that the claim for refund made by the appellant had to be decided according to the law laid down by this Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. (1996 (12) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) and would not be governed by the proviso to sub-rule (5) of Rule 9B.

The restrictions in Section 11A and Section 11B would not apply to refund claims consequent upon finalisation of provisional assessment orders. In favour of assessee.