Refund claim limitation turns on an earlier letter seeking excess duty refund, which was treated as the operative application.

A written request to the jurisdictional Superintendent seeking refund of excess duty was treated as a valid refund claim for limitation purposes because it clearly asked for repayment and was entertained without immediate objection to its form. The department later required a formal application and then sought to reject the claim as time barred, but the earlier letter was held to be the operative refund claim since the request had already been acted upon. On that basis, the refund was found to be within time and the rejection on limitation was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's letter addressed to the department could be treated as a valid refund claim within time, so that the subsequent formal refund application was not barred by limitation.

Analysis: The assessee had written to the jurisdictional Superintendent seeking refund of excess duty paid and expected the refund to be granted on finalisation of the RT 12 assessment. The department entertained the letter and did not immediately require a formal claim in the prescribed format. Only later was the assessee told to file a regular refund application, by which time the department sought to reject the claim as time barred. Since the earlier letter itself clearly sought refund of the excess amount and had been acted upon without prompt objection as to form, it was treated as the refund claim for limitation purposes.

Conclusion: The letter dated 27-3-1996 was a valid refund claim and the refund was within time.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the order rejecting the refund on limitation was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a refund request clearly seeking return of excess duty is entertained by the department without immediate objection to form, that request may be treated as the refund application for limitation purposes.

---