https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33455 A refund claim under Rule 5 was treated as timely where the original application was filed within one year of export, even though the department returned it for objections and it was resubmitted later. The refund was not available in full for exports under the DEEC scheme, so the admissible amount had to be segregated between DEEC and non-DEEC consignments and tested against the conditions of Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.). The matter was therefore remanded for verification and recomputation of the refundable quantum on merits. en-us Tue, 03 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33455 A refund claim under Rule 5 was treated as timely where the original application was filed within one year of export, even though the department returned it for objections and it was resubmitted later. The refund was not available in full for exports under the DEEC scheme, so the admissible amount had to be segregated between DEEC and non-DEEC consignments and tested against the conditions of Notification No. 11/2002-C.E. (N.T.). The matter was therefore remanded for verification and recomputation of the refundable quantum on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33455