Refund claim limitation turned on departmental receipt, with processing by the office treated as valid filing on the facts.

A refund application filed with the Superintendent of Central Excise was treated as received on behalf of the Assistant Collector where the departmental office entertained the claim, called for treasury challans, issued reminders, and indicated that the matter would be processed and forwarded. On those facts, the amended filing requirement did not justify rejection as time-barred, because the department's conduct showed actual receipt and processing within the office hierarchy. The claim was therefore to be considered in the proper course, and refund remained available if otherwise admissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim, initially filed before the Superintendent of Central Excise and acted upon by the departmental authorities, could be treated as duly received on behalf of the Assistant Collector so as to avoid rejection as time-barred under the amended refund rule.

Analysis: The refund claim was presented after the amendment introducing the requirement that such claims be filed before the Assistant Collector. However, the departmental record showed that the Superintendent did not treat the matter as closed; instead, the office called for treasury challans, issued reminders, and indicated that the claim would be finalised and forwarded to the Assistant Collector. On these facts, the case was distinguished from the earlier decision relied upon by the Revenue, because the departmental conduct here showed actual entertainment of the claim within the office hierarchy. In that setting, the filing before the Superintendent was treated as receipt on behalf of the Assistant Collector.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not liable to be rejected as time-barred on the facts of the case, and the assessee was entitled to refund if otherwise admissible.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed, with the refund claim directed to be considered as received in proper course.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the departmental office has entertained a refund application, called for supporting documents, and taken steps toward processing and forwarding it, the claim may be treated as received on behalf of the proper authority for purposes of limitation under the refund rule.

---