Refund entitlement under excise notification survives delayed filing of duty-paid statement where eligibility and limitation are satisfied.

Delayed filing of the duty-paid statement did not, by itself, defeat entitlement to refund under Notification No. 33/99-C.E. The notification prescribed the manner and time for filing and verification, but it did not require rejection of a claim solely for late filing where eligibility under the notification was undisputed. The refund claim was also within the normal limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the RT-12 returns already showed the duty-paid particulars. The assessee therefore remained entitled to the refund benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund under Notification No. 33/99-C.E. could be denied solely because the statement of duty paid was filed after the stipulated time.

Analysis: The notification prescribed the manner and time for filing the statement and for verification by the Assistant Commissioner, but the delayed filing did not, by itself, extinguish the entitlement to the refund. The refund claim was also within the normal period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The RT-12 returns already reflected the duty-paid particulars, and the notification did not insist on any particular form of filing. There was no dispute regarding eligibility under the notification.

Conclusion: The delayed filing of the statement did not defeat the refund claim, and the assessee remained entitled to the benefit of the notification.

---