https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72791 A refund claim under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had to comply with the rule's own limitation period because the refund remedy existed within the statutory scheme and remained binding until substituted by Section 11B. The Tribunal held that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to courts and not to quasi-judicial tribunals or excise authorities, so it could not extend a refund application filed beyond one year. The claim was therefore time barred under Rule 11. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 May 2011 11:07:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72791 A refund claim under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had to comply with the rule's own limitation period because the refund remedy existed within the statutory scheme and remained binding until substituted by Section 11B. The Tribunal held that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to courts and not to quasi-judicial tribunals or excise authorities, so it could not extend a refund application filed beyond one year. The claim was therefore time barred under Rule 11. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72791