Limitation for duty refund claims under the governing refund provision was decisive, but undisputed facts supported the grant of refund.

Refund claims for duty paid on motor vehicles later registered as taxis turned on the limitation period under the refund provisions. The claims were filed beyond six months from the date of duty payment, but the relevant dates of clearance and refund filing were undisputed, and the governing refund provision, Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, had been amended from 12-5-2000. In the absence of any legally sustainable ground to upset the refund, the appellate authority did not interfere with the grant of refund and the Revenue appeals failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claims for duty paid on motor vehicles subsequently registered as taxis were barred by limitation under the refund provisions and liable to be rejected.

Analysis: The refund claims were filed beyond the prescribed period of six months from the date of payment of duty. The record showed that the relevant statutory provision governing refund, namely Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, had been amended with effect from 12-5-2000. The dates of clearance of the vehicles and filing of the refund claims were not in dispute. No other valid ground was shown to disturb the order granting refund.

Conclusion: The refund claims were not interfered with, and the Revenue appeals failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the factual dates are undisputed and no legally sustainable ground is shown to defeat the refund claim, the appellate authority will not interfere with the grant of refund under the governing limitation provision.

---