Substantial compliance with protest requirement preserves refund limitation benefit where duty is paid under protest on goods already in appeal

Duty paid under protest can preserve a refund claim from limitation under the proviso to section 11B where the protest is substantially compliant and the classification of the goods is already sub judice in a pending appeal. A letter stating that duty would be paid under protest was held sufficient for paper cones and tubes because those goods were covered by the appeal and the protest remained operative despite imperfect wording. The same letter did not extend to paper cores and spools, for which no appeal was pending. Refund relief was therefore confined to the duty relatable to paper cones and tubes, with consequential quantification directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the letter dated 3-3-1983 constituted a valid protest so as to attract the proviso to section 11B and save the refund claim from limitation in relation to duty paid on paper cones and tubes.

Analysis: The refund dispute turned on whether the protest requirement had been sufficiently met. The letter stated that duty from 1-3-1983 would be paid under protest, though it was not happily worded and did not expressly state the reason for protest. The goods paper cones and tubes were already the subject matter of a pending appeal on classification when the relevant classification list was filed and duty was paid. In that factual setting, the protest was held to be alive and substantially complied with for those two goods. The same letter could not, however, support protest for paper cores and spools, for which no appeal was pending.

Conclusion: The letter dated 3-3-1983 was a valid protest for paper cones and tubes, and the refund claim for duty paid on those goods was entitled to the benefit of the proviso to section 11B. The claim was not barred by limitation for that part of the refund.

Final Conclusion: Refund relief was granted only for the duty relatable to paper cones and tubes during the relevant period, with the Assistant Collector directed to quantify and allow the consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duty is paid under protest in relation to goods whose classification is already sub judice in a pending appeal, substantial compliance with the protest requirement is sufficient to exclude limitation under section 11B for those goods.

---