https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111418 A refund arising as a consequential benefit of appellate relief was treated as distinct from an independent refund claim and, on that approach, was not governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The earlier refund adjustments were viewed as a closed transaction with no bearing on the later entitlement that arose only after the appellate order. Once the appellate relief created the refund entitlement, the authorities were required to grant it on their own motion. The claim could not be rejected as time-barred, and the absence of protest or compliance with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 did not defeat the refund. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111418 A refund arising as a consequential benefit of appellate relief was treated as distinct from an independent refund claim and, on that approach, was not governed by Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The earlier refund adjustments were viewed as a closed transaction with no bearing on the later entitlement that arose only after the appellate order. Once the appellate relief created the refund entitlement, the authorities were required to grant it on their own motion. The claim could not be rejected as time-barred, and the absence of protest or compliance with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 did not defeat the refund. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111418