Refund limitation under Central Excise rules depends on proof of payment under protest; unsupported plea was not accepted.

Refund claims under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act were treated as time-barred where the duty payments were not properly shown to have been made under protest in terms of Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Endorsements of "under protest" in TR-6 challans and reliance on an earlier remand order were insufficient because the necessary factual basis was not raised in the memorandum of appeal. The result was that the plea that all payments were made under protest could not be accepted, and the claim for the period up to 18-11-1990 remained barred by limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim for the period up to 18-11-1990 was barred by limitation on the ground that the duty payments were not shown to have been made under protest in accordance with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Analysis: The refund claim for the relevant earlier period had been rejected as time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, while the lower appellate authority accepted protest only for payments made from 19-11-1990 onwards. In the further appeal, reliance was placed on endorsements of "under protest" in TR-6 challans and on an earlier remand order. The Tribunal declined to entertain the contention because the necessary factual foundation was absent from the memorandum of appeal. It held that, in the absence of such a plea, the argument that all payments were made under protest could not be accepted.

Conclusion: The refund claim for the period up to 18-11-1990 remained time-barred and the challenge failed.

---