Refund of differential excise duty on Vitamin Premix upheld for substantial periods despite procedural objections and limitation challenge.

Refund of differential central excise duty on Vitamin Premix was treated as admissible from the date the classification list claiming Tariff Item 68 was filed and later approved, with no reason to deny it effect from 9-3-1981. The assessee had paid duty in full, so provisional assessment and bond requirements under Rule 173-B(2-A) read with Rule 9-B were not necessary. Protest endorsements and letters to the department supported the claim. Rule 233-B, effective from 1-6-1981, did not defeat the substantial claim after 9-6-1981, though the short interval from 1-6-1981 to 9-6-1981 was treated as defective. Limitation under Section 11B did not bar the admissible portion.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim for differential central excise duty on the product 'Vitamin Premix' was admissible for the periods prior to and after 1-6-1981, and whether non-compliance with the protest procedure or provisional assessment procedure barred the claim.

Analysis: The classification list claiming Tariff Item 68 was filed on 9-3-1981 and was eventually approved, and there was no reason to deny it effect from the date of filing. The assessee had been paying duty in full, so the formal procedure for provisional assessment and execution of bond under Rule 173-B(2-A) read with Rule 9-B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not required in the circumstances. The claim was also supported by the assessee's protest endorsements and letters addressed to the department. Rule 233-B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, which came into force on 1-6-1981, did not affect the substantial portion of the claim after 9-6-1981, while only the short interval from 1-6-1981 to 9-6-1981 could be treated as defective under that rule. The limitation objection under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 therefore did not defeat the admissible portion of the refund claim.

Conclusion: The refund claim was admissible for the periods 9-3-1981 to 31-5-1981 and 10-6-1981 to 30-10-1981, while the balance of the claim was rejected.

---