Payment under protest on TR-6 challan can satisfy procedure and keep refund limitation out of play

An endorsement of protest on a TR-6 challan was treated as sufficient compliance with the procedure for payment under protest where duty was paid only once through that challan. The protest notation itself was held enough, with no further procedural step required under Rule 233B(4) in the absence of additional payments. On that basis, the refund claim was not barred by limitation, and the limitation objection failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether endorsement of protest on the TR-6 challan amounted to valid payment under protest so as to exclude the limitation period for the refund claim.

Analysis: The refund arose from a single payment made through a TR-6 challan, and the challan itself carried an endorsement of payment under protest. Since no further payments flowed from that amount, there was no additional procedural step required under Rule 233B(4) beyond the endorsement on the challan. On these facts, the protest endorsement was treated as sufficient compliance with the prescribed procedure, and the refund claim could not be defeated on limitation.

Conclusion: The protest endorsement on the TR-6 challan was sufficient compliance, and the limitation objection was not applicable; the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duty is paid only once through a TR-6 challan and the challan itself bears a clear endorsement of protest, that endorsement can constitute sufficient compliance with the procedure for payment under protest, with the result that limitation for refund does not apply.

---