Refund limitation under Section 11B applies to buyers unless they themselves paid duty under protest.

In a refund claim under Section 11B by a person other than the manufacturer, the exclusion of the six months' limitation for duty paid under protest applies only if the claimant himself paid the duty under protest. The Tribunal construed the proviso in the context of the amended refund scheme, under which the relevant date for a non-manufacturer claimant is the date of purchase, and held that the protest mechanism in Rule 233B is tied to payment by the assessee who seeks relief. A protest by the manufacturer did not extend the benefit to the buyer, so the limitation period continued to apply to the claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether the second proviso to Section 11B(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, excluding the six months' limitation where duty has been paid under protest, applies to a refund claim filed by a person other than the manufacturer when the duty was paid under protest by the manufacturer.

Analysis: Section 11B permits refund claims by any person, but the Tribunal read the second proviso in the context of the amended scheme of refund, under which the relevant date for a claimant other than the manufacturer is the date of purchase of the goods. The Tribunal held that the expression "any duty has been paid under protest" must be understood with reference to the claimant who seeks refund, not merely the manufacturer who originally paid duty. Since Rule 233B and the protest mechanism are tied to payment by the assessee, the benefit of the protest proviso was held not to extend to a buyer or other non-manufacturer claimant. On that construction, the six months' limitation continued to apply to the appellant's claim.

Conclusion: The second proviso to Section 11B(1) did not apply to the appellant's refund claim, and the claim was barred by limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: In a refund claim under Section 11B by a person other than the manufacturer, the exclusion of limitation for duty paid under protest applies only where the claimant himself paid the duty under protest; a protest by the manufacturer does not dispense with the six months' limitation for the buyer.

---