https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91215 Duty paid twice on the same goods was treated as an erroneous payment, and a refund claim filed within the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act was admissible. Correction of documents was not covered by Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, and the proper route for bringing duty-paid goods back into the factory would have been Rule 173H or Rule 51A. Since the Revenue did not dispute the double payment, the refund claim had to be considered on that basis and the challenge failed. en-us Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:43:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91215 Duty paid twice on the same goods was treated as an erroneous payment, and a refund claim filed within the limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act was admissible. Correction of documents was not covered by Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, and the proper route for bringing duty-paid goods back into the factory would have been Rule 173H or Rule 51A. Since the Revenue did not dispute the double payment, the refund claim had to be considered on that basis and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91215