https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325039 Refund under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 could not be denied merely because of procedural lapses where export of duty-paid goods, the nexus with duty-paid inputs, and supporting documents such as export records and bank realisation evidence were established; the substantive refund claim was therefore allowed. However, refund claims had still to comply with the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and any portion filed beyond that period was independently time-barred and inadmissible. Partial relief was granted by setting aside rejection for claims otherwise within time while excluding the barred portion. en-us Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 May 2016 11:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325039 Refund under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 could not be denied merely because of procedural lapses where export of duty-paid goods, the nexus with duty-paid inputs, and supporting documents such as export records and bank realisation evidence were established; the substantive refund claim was therefore allowed. However, refund claims had still to comply with the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and any portion filed beyond that period was independently time-barred and inadmissible. Partial relief was granted by setting aside rejection for claims otherwise within time while excluding the barred portion. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325039