https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82519 For refund claims relating to returned goods reprocessed in a factory, limitation is tested from the original filing made with the officer having jurisdiction over that reprocessing factory, because Section 11B treats the relevant date as the date of entry for remaking, refining or reconditioning. Rule 97 also contemplates verification at the factory where the goods are actually processed, so a later departmental transmission of papers to another collectorate is only a procedural step and cannot defeat a bona fide claim filed within time. The earlier remand likewise did not finally reject the limitation plea, so the de novo adjudication remained within the remand scope. The refund claim was therefore not time-barred and had to be decided on merits. en-us Fri, 26 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jul 2011 16:32:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82519 For refund claims relating to returned goods reprocessed in a factory, limitation is tested from the original filing made with the officer having jurisdiction over that reprocessing factory, because Section 11B treats the relevant date as the date of entry for remaking, refining or reconditioning. Rule 97 also contemplates verification at the factory where the goods are actually processed, so a later departmental transmission of papers to another collectorate is only a procedural step and cannot defeat a bona fide claim filed within time. The earlier remand likewise did not finally reject the limitation plea, so the de novo adjudication remained within the remand scope. The refund claim was therefore not time-barred and had to be decided on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82519