https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82787 A refund claim addressed to the competent Assistant Collector was not time-barred merely because it was routed through the Superintendent of Central Excise and reached the Assistant Collector after the limitation period. The statutory scheme required the refund application to be made to the proper authority, but did not prescribe a rigid mode of physical presentation; the delay in onward transmission was treated as procedural and could not defeat a claim otherwise lodged within time. No estoppel arose to override the statute, because the method adopted did not contravene the statutory requirement governing presentation of the refund application. en-us Fri, 27 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jul 2011 13:02:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82787 A refund claim addressed to the competent Assistant Collector was not time-barred merely because it was routed through the Superintendent of Central Excise and reached the Assistant Collector after the limitation period. The statutory scheme required the refund application to be made to the proper authority, but did not prescribe a rigid mode of physical presentation; the delay in onward transmission was treated as procedural and could not defeat a claim otherwise lodged within time. No estoppel arose to override the statute, because the method adopted did not contravene the statutory requirement governing presentation of the refund application. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82787