Refund under protest cannot be denied for Rule 233B non-compliance where the applicable rules did not require it.

Refund could not be denied as time-barred on the basis of alleged non-compliance with Rule 233B, because that rule applied only to the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 and not to the Central Excise Rules, 2001/2002 for the substantial disputed period. The Tribunal also accepted the factual finding that the assessee had conveyed protest through the RT-12 return, and that finding remained unrebutted by the Revenue. As a result, the objection on protest procedure and limitation failed, and the refund claim was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund could be denied as time-barred for alleged non-compliance with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and whether the payment was made under protest for the relevant period.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that Rule 233B applied only to the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 and not to the subsequent Central Excise Rules, 2001/2002 for the substantial period in dispute. It also accepted the factual finding recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the respondent had intimated protest through the RT-12 return, and that finding was not rebutted by the Revenue. In these circumstances, the Revenue's objection based on non-compliance with the protest procedure and consequent limitation could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The refund claim could not be rejected on the ground of alleged non-compliance with Rule 233B or time-bar, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---