Modvat credit cannot be rejected as time-barred where no limitation applies and delay is properly explained.

Modvat credit could not be refused merely because the claim was made belatedly where no limitation period was prescribed. The Court held that, if delay was explained, the excise authority had to consider that explanation before rejecting the claim on limitation grounds. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered by the authority after taking the petitioner's explanation for delay into account.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refusal of Modvat credit on the ground of belated claim was sustainable when no period of limitation was prescribed and the delay was explained by the petitioner.

Analysis: The claim for Modvat credit was rejected solely as delayed. The Court held that the law did not prescribe any limitation period for making such a claim and that, where delay was explained, the authority was bound to consider the explanation before rejecting the claim on that ground.

Conclusion: The matter was required to be reconsidered by the excise authority after taking into account the explanation for delay.

---