https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83289 The case involved interpreting provisions for refund claims under Notification No. 43/82-C.E., specifically regarding the calculation of the limitation period based on annual turnover. The Tribunal upheld that the limitation period starts from the end of the Financial Year, not from the date of payment. Due to conflicting views among judicial authorities on this issue, the matter was referred to the High Court for clarification. Additionally, the case raised the question of whether CEGAT can exceed the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, in adjudicating refund claims, emphasizing the need for clarity and uniformity in legal principles. en-us Fri, 26 Nov 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Jul 2011 15:30:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83289 The case involved interpreting provisions for refund claims under Notification No. 43/82-C.E., specifically regarding the calculation of the limitation period based on annual turnover. The Tribunal upheld that the limitation period starts from the end of the Financial Year, not from the date of payment. Due to conflicting views among judicial authorities on this issue, the matter was referred to the High Court for clarification. Additionally, the case raised the question of whether CEGAT can exceed the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, in adjudicating refund claims, emphasizing the need for clarity and uniformity in legal principles. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 Nov 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83289