https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73248 A refund claim for excess central excise duty paid before 6-8-1977 was analysed under the limitation framework in the old Rule 11 read with Rule 173J of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The text states that the refund right arose while the earlier rule was in force and was a vested, accrued right. It further notes that the amended Rule 11 operated prospectively and could not extinguish existing refund rights absent express or necessary implication. On that basis, the applicable limitation remained the one-year period under the earlier rule, rather than the six-month period introduced by the amendment, so the claim was not time-barred. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 May 2011 15:46:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73248 A refund claim for excess central excise duty paid before 6-8-1977 was analysed under the limitation framework in the old Rule 11 read with Rule 173J of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The text states that the refund right arose while the earlier rule was in force and was a vested, accrued right. It further notes that the amended Rule 11 operated prospectively and could not extinguish existing refund rights absent express or necessary implication. On that basis, the applicable limitation remained the one-year period under the earlier rule, rather than the six-month period introduced by the amendment, so the claim was not time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73248