https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80577 Refund of excise duty was treated as admissible where the assessee had paid duty twice on the same goods, even though the prescribed procedure was not strictly followed. The order applies the principle that a procedural lapse should not defeat a substantive entitlement when the underlying duty burden has already been borne and retention of the second duty payment would be unjustified. The reasoning also notes that the department indicated the transaction could have been completed under an alternative procedural route, reinforcing that refund should not be denied on technical grounds. en-us Mon, 24 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 17:08:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80577 Refund of excise duty was treated as admissible where the assessee had paid duty twice on the same goods, even though the prescribed procedure was not strictly followed. The order applies the principle that a procedural lapse should not defeat a substantive entitlement when the underlying duty burden has already been borne and retention of the second duty payment would be unjustified. The reasoning also notes that the department indicated the transaction could have been completed under an alternative procedural route, reinforcing that refund should not be denied on technical grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80577