Provisional tax levy refunds cannot be time-barred where the governing statute provides no limitation period for claims.

Refund arising from a provisional tax levy collected at an ad valorem rate could not be rejected as time-barred under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 where Section 5 of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 governed the refund. The applicable statutory provision expressly allowed refund of excess collections when the finally enacted provision substituted a different rate and did not prescribe any limitation period for claiming such refund. On that basis, the limitation-based rejection was unsustainable, and the refund claim was held to be within time, subject to verification before sanction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim arising from the levy collected under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 could be rejected as time-barred under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, when Section 5 of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 governed the refund.

Analysis: The duty had been collected at the ad valorem rate under the provisional levy, but the finally enacted provision substituted a specific rate, making excess collections refundable to the extent duty had been collected beyond the duty ultimately leviable. Section 5 of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931 expressly provided for refunds where the declared provision came into operation in amended form and did not prescribe any time limit for claiming such refund. On that basis, the limitation-based rejection under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not stand.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not time-barred, and the rejection was set aside with a direction to sanction the refund after verification.

---