Written refund claims for Modvat credit can satisfy limitation, with later formal applications relating back to the original request.

A written refund request for reversed and unutilised Modvat credit was treated as a valid claim for limitation purposes, even though it was not filed in the prescribed form and was initially unsupported by documents. The relevant date for Section 11B limitation was held to be the date of the first written refund claim, and a later formal application related back to that original request. On that basis, the refund claims were within time and the six-month bar did not apply.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claims of reversed and unutilised Modvat credit relating to export clearances were barred by limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act when the assessee's initial letter seeking refund was not in the prescribed form.

Analysis: The refund request was made in writing by the assessee explaining that Modvat credit had been reversed on a mistaken understanding of law and that another amount remained unutilised. The filing could not be rejected merely because it was not in the prescribed format or was initially unsupported by documents. For limitation purposes, the relevant date was the date of the first written refund claim, and a later formal application was only a continuation of that original claim. The claim therefore fell within time and was not hit by the six-month limit under Section 11B.

Conclusion: The refund claims were not barred by limitation and the objection of time-bar was rejected in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and both appeals succeeded on the issue of limitation for refund of Modvat credit.

Ratio Decidendi: A written refund claim seeking return of duty credit, though filed in an informal form, constitutes a valid claim for limitation purposes, and a subsequent formal application relates back to the original claim.

---