Refund limitation under Central Excise law applied where payment under protest was not proved and the time bar defeated relief.

Refund of central excise duty for the earlier period was held to remain subject to statutory limitation because the assessee failed to prove that payment had been made under protest. The alleged protest letter was not shown to have been submitted to the excise authorities, so the plea of protest was not established. In the absence of proof of protest, the authorities were bound to apply the prescribed time bar, and the refund claim for the prior period was rejected despite the contention that the levy was without authority of law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim for duty paid on boards for the earlier period was barred by limitation under the Central Excise law and whether the assessee had proved payment under protest so as to avoid the time bar.

Analysis: The refund claim before the departmental authorities had to be tested within the framework of the Central Excise Act and the rules made thereunder. The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to produce evidence that the alleged protest letter of 20 May 1964 had been submitted to the excise authorities, and therefore the plea of payment under protest was not established. In the absence of proof of protest, the claim for refund for the earlier period remained subject to the prescribed limitation, and the authorities acting under the statute were bound to apply that limitation even where the levy was later contended to be without authority of law.

Conclusion: The refund claim for the prior period was time-barred and the assessee was not entitled to relief on the plea of protest or absence of authority of law.

---