https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167202 Exemption under Notification No. 198/76 depended on approval of a declaration fixing base clearance before concessional duty could operate. A contemporaneous letter asking the department to confirm the claim and adjust excess duty already paid in the RT-12 return was treated as a valid refund claim, even though the prescribed refund form was not used, because no mandatory rule made that form essential. The later fresh declaration and its approval supported the position that the claim remained pending until approval, so limitation could not be computed rigidly only from the dates of duty payment. The refund claim was therefore held to be within time and the limitation objection was rejected. en-us Wed, 14 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Dec 2014 13:14:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167202 Exemption under Notification No. 198/76 depended on approval of a declaration fixing base clearance before concessional duty could operate. A contemporaneous letter asking the department to confirm the claim and adjust excess duty already paid in the RT-12 return was treated as a valid refund claim, even though the prescribed refund form was not used, because no mandatory rule made that form essential. The later fresh declaration and its approval supported the position that the claim remained pending until approval, so limitation could not be computed rigidly only from the dates of duty payment. The refund claim was therefore held to be within time and the limitation objection was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167202