https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44920 Refund of excise duty collected contrary to law was held not maintainable for the period beyond six months, because the claim fell outside the applicable limitation period. The Assistant Collector confined relief to the six-month period and rejected the earlier portion as time-barred. A High Court direction to consider the entire claim on merits could not stand after the governing law declared in Mafatlal Industries, and the barred portion of the refund claim could not be entertained. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 10:37:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44920 Refund of excise duty collected contrary to law was held not maintainable for the period beyond six months, because the claim fell outside the applicable limitation period. The Assistant Collector confined relief to the six-month period and rejected the earlier portion as time-barred. A High Court direction to consider the entire claim on merits could not stand after the governing law declared in Mafatlal Industries, and the barred portion of the refund claim could not be entertained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44920