https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86962 A pre-deposit made to pursue an appeal is not treated as an independent final payment of duty for refund-limitation purposes, so the six-month limit under Section 11B does not bar consequential refund after success in appeal. The appellate relief must be implemented notwithstanding delay in filing the refund claim. An order rejecting such refund as time-barred was treated as without jurisdiction and void, and the Tribunal's procedural powers were recognised as sufficient to set aside the defective departmental refusal and direct refund to give effect to its appellate order. en-us Thu, 08 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:07:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86962 A pre-deposit made to pursue an appeal is not treated as an independent final payment of duty for refund-limitation purposes, so the six-month limit under Section 11B does not bar consequential refund after success in appeal. The appellate relief must be implemented notwithstanding delay in filing the refund claim. An order rejecting such refund as time-barred was treated as without jurisdiction and void, and the Tribunal's procedural powers were recognised as sufficient to set aside the defective departmental refusal and direct refund to give effect to its appellate order. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86962