Refund limitation depends on proving collectorate practice for routing claims through the Superintendent before time-bar can apply.

Where refund timeliness depends on an asserted collectorate practice of routing claims through the Superintendent, that practice must be established on evidence before the claim can be treated as time-barred. The Tribunal noted that earlier authority allowed the Superintendent's presentation date to count only when such a practice was proved, and here no factual finding had been made on whether that practice existed in the relevant collectorate. Rejection of the refund claim on limitation was therefore unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication on the existence and effect of the alleged practice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred by limitation and, for that purpose, whether the date of presentation to the Superintendent could be treated as the date of filing before the Assistant Collector in view of the alleged prevalent collectorate practice.

Analysis: The claim had been rejected solely on the footing that it reached the Assistant Collector after the prescribed period under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal noted that earlier decisions had treated presentation to the Superintendent as the relevant date only where there was a proven practice of receiving refund applications through the Superintendent for onward processing and submission to the Assistant Collector. In the present matter, neither the Assistant Collector nor the Appellate Collector had examined whether such a practice existed in the Madurai Collectorate during the relevant period, and the record did not permit a conclusive finding on that question.

Conclusion: The rejection on limitation could not be sustained, and the matter required fresh adjudication on the existence and effect of the alleged practice.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the orders below were set aside, and the refund claim was remitted for fresh decision by the Assistant Collector.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the timeliness of a refund application depends on an asserted administrative practice of routing claims through the Superintendent, that practice must be examined and found as a fact before the claim can be held time-barred.

---