Pre-deposit treatment in refund claims under section 11B was remanded for reconsideration after cited precedents were overlooked.

Refund of amounts paid during investigation and pending appeal turned on whether the sums qualified as pre-deposit, which would take the claim outside the limitation period under section 11B. The lower authorities had treated the refund as time-barred on the basis that the payment was not a pre-deposit. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had relied on multiple decisions on the same issue and that, on a prima facie basis, part of the amount had been treated as pre-deposit while the balance had been denied similar treatment. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision after considering the cited judgments.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amount paid during investigation and during pendency of the appeal was a pre-deposit, so as to take the refund claim outside the limitation period under section 11B.

Analysis: The lower authorities treated the refund claim as governed by section 11B on the footing that the disputed amount was not a pre-deposit and, therefore, rejected the refund as time-barred. The Tribunal noted that the appellant relied on several decisions on the same issue and found that, on a prima facie view, a part of the same amount had been treated as pre-deposit while the balance had been denied similar treatment, which required reconsideration.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after considering the judgments cited by the appellant.

---