Customs refund limitation barred the claim because an exemption request was not a valid protest under the statute.

A refund claim under the Customs Act was held time-barred because it was filed more than one year and eleven months after duty payment, and the later grant of exemption under Section 25(2) did not override the statutory limitation under Section 27. An earlier request for exemption was not a valid protest within Section 27(1), so it could not save the claim from the limitation bar. The claim was therefore rightly rejected as barred by time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was barred by limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and whether the importer's earlier letter could be treated as a letter of protest so as to avoid the statutory bar.

Analysis: The refund application was filed after more than one year and eleven months from the date of payment of duty. The exemption subsequently granted under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 did not displace the limitation prescribed for refund claims. A request for exemption could not be construed as a protest within the meaning of Section 27(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Tribunal, being bound by the statute, had no power to grant refund contrary to the limitation period.

Conclusion: The refund claim was barred by limitation, the alleged letter did not amount to a valid protest, and the dismissal of the appeal was justified.

---