Refund limitation under section 11B bars a later claim where no protest or timely refund application was filed.

Refund could not be granted for the period 11-5-1982 to 17-8-1982 because no classification list or refund claim was on record for that period, duty had not been paid under protest, and no periodical refund application had been filed to preserve limitation. The later claim was therefore time-barred under section 11B, and the fact that the appellant subsequently obtained the benefit of the notification did not revive an otherwise barred refund claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to refund for the period 11-5-1982 to 17-8-1982 notwithstanding the absence of a refund claim or protest for that period, and whether the refund application was barred by limitation under section 11B.

Analysis: For the relevant period, there was neither a classification list nor a refund claim on record. The duty payment was not made under protest, and no periodical refund application had been filed to save limitation. The later refund application was outside time and the claim could not be entertained merely because the appellant had eventually obtained the benefit of the notification.

Conclusion: The refund claim for the period 11-5-1982 to 17-8-1982 was barred by limitation and the claim failed.

---