https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180742 Refund under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (N.T.) could not be rejected merely because the CENVAT credit account was not debited before filing the refund claim. The Tribunal treated the issue as covered by its earlier ruling on the same notification and held that the substantive condition was satisfied once the account was debited, even if the debit occurred after filing. The failure to debit on the filing date was a procedural lapse, not a disqualifying defect, where the notification's other conditions were met. Refund entitlement therefore accrued upon the later debit, and denial on that ground was not justified. en-us Thu, 26 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:02:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180742 Refund under Notification No. 27/2012-CE (N.T.) could not be rejected merely because the CENVAT credit account was not debited before filing the refund claim. The Tribunal treated the issue as covered by its earlier ruling on the same notification and held that the substantive condition was satisfied once the account was debited, even if the debit occurred after filing. The failure to debit on the filing date was a procedural lapse, not a disqualifying defect, where the notification's other conditions were met. Refund entitlement therefore accrued upon the later debit, and denial on that ground was not justified. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180742