Duty paid under protest and pre-adjudication deposits were held refundable without Section 27 limitation.

Money paid under protest, including amounts deposited before adjudication for provisional clearance of goods, is not subject to limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 so long as the protest has not been withdrawn and the dispute remains unresolved. Such pre-adjudication deposits retain the character of refundable pre-deposits, and an adverse adjudication order does not by itself end the protest or trigger the refund limitation period. The refund claim was therefore not time-barred, and the assessee was held entitled to refund with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim arising from duty paid under protest and amounts deposited prior to adjudication was barred by limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The amount was deposited before adjudication for provisional clearance of the goods and the protest recorded by the assessee was not shown to have been withdrawn. Once duty is paid under protest, the protest does not cease merely because an adverse adjudication order is passed, and the limitation under Section 27 does not apply to such refund. The deposits made before any confirmed demand also retained the character of pre-deposits, which were refundable on success of the assessee's case without attracting limitation.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not time-barred and was payable to the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders rejecting the refund were set aside and the assessee was held entitled to refund with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Money paid under protest, including pre-adjudication deposits made for release of goods, is not hit by the limitation applicable to refund claims under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 until the dispute is finally concluded.

---