https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167483 A refund claim on cancelled gate passes was found untenable because the mandatory intimation to the proper officer under Rule 173G(2), proviso (vii), was not effectively complied with and the department could not verify that the goods had remained in the factory. The Tribunal treated the timing requirement as a revenue safeguard that could not be ignored. It also found the refund application was filed beyond the prescribed period and was therefore barred by limitation. The refund was consequently rejected, and the order granting refund was set aside. en-us Sat, 23 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Dec 2014 11:26:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167483 A refund claim on cancelled gate passes was found untenable because the mandatory intimation to the proper officer under Rule 173G(2), proviso (vii), was not effectively complied with and the department could not verify that the goods had remained in the factory. The Tribunal treated the timing requirement as a revenue safeguard that could not be ignored. It also found the refund application was filed beyond the prescribed period and was therefore barred by limitation. The refund was consequently rejected, and the order granting refund was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 23 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167483