Excise duty refund claims: protest letters must be read as a whole, and non-acceptance of liability defeats limitation.

Excise duty refund claims are not time-barred under Section 11B where the duty was paid under protest, and a protest need not follow any prescribed form. The assessee's correspondence, read as a whole and in context with the department's demand communication, showed non-acceptance of liability to pay excise duty even though it also referred to objections on licensing. On that construction, the payment was treated as made under protest, so the statutory exception to limitation applied and the refund claim could not be rejected as barred by time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim for excise duty was barred by limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, or whether the duty had been paid under protest so as to attract the statutory exception to limitation.

Analysis: The protest letter was not to be read in isolation. Read with the departmental communication that asserted duty liability on the goods manufactured and sought particulars for recovery of duty, the assessee's reply showed a clear challenge to the liability to pay excise duty itself, even though it also referred to protest against obtaining a licence. A protest need not be in any particular form, and it is sufficient if the correspondence shows non-acceptance of liability. The letter, construed as a whole and in its context, amounted to a protest against both licensing and duty liability.

Conclusion: The payment of excise duty was held to have been made under protest, and the refund claim could not be rejected as time-barred under Section 11B.

Ratio Decidendi: A letter of protest must be construed as a whole in its factual context, and if it clearly indicates non-acceptance of excise duty liability, the statutory exception for duty paid under protest applies even without any prescribed form or particularised grounds.

---