Payment under protest in RG-23A register defeats limitation objection and keeps refund claim open for merits

Payment of duty under protest recorded in RG-23A Part-II was treated as sufficient compliance with the protest procedure, because the debit, re-credit and later re-debit showed a single payment under protest. On that basis, the refund claim was not barred by limitation and Section 11B did not apply. The objection that Rule 233B was not strictly followed was rejected, as the protest endorsement in the register itself was held adequate. The rejection of refund on limitation was set aside and the matter remanded for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred by limitation when the duty amount had been debited in RG-23A Part-II under protest and whether such endorsement constituted sufficient compliance with the procedure for payment under protest.

Analysis: The appellant had initially debited the amount under protest, later re-credited it suo motu, and thereafter again debited the same amount under protest after departmental correspondence. The Tribunal held that this was, in substance, a single payment under protest duly recorded in the RG-23A Part-II register. In such a case, the assessee could not be expected to follow any procedure other than recording the protest in the register itself. The earlier decisions relied upon supported the view that protest endorsement was sufficient and that limitation under Section 11B did not apply to such a payment made under protest. The objection based on non-compliance with Rule 233B was therefore rejected.

Conclusion: The rejection of the refund claim on the ground of limitation was set aside and the matter was remanded for decision on merits.

---