https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46615 SC held that delay by departmental authorities in processing a refund application does not extinguish the claimant's right due to a later amendment to sub-rule (5) of Rule 9B. The Commissioner and CEGAT were upheld in ruling the refund claim must be decided under the law previously laid down by this Court, not by the proviso to sub-rule (5). Restrictions in Sections 11A and 11B do not apply to refunds following finalisation of provisional assessment orders; decision for assessee. en-us Wed, 06 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Sep 2025 17:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46615 SC held that delay by departmental authorities in processing a refund application does not extinguish the claimant's right due to a later amendment to sub-rule (5) of Rule 9B. The Commissioner and CEGAT were upheld in ruling the refund claim must be decided under the law previously laid down by this Court, not by the proviso to sub-rule (5). Restrictions in Sections 11A and 11B do not apply to refunds following finalisation of provisional assessment orders; decision for assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46615