Duty paid under protest: timely protest letter overrides missing gate-pass endorsement; refund limitation bar rejected.

A timely protest letter filed with the department was treated as sufficient compliance for claiming duty paid under protest, and the absence of endorsement on gate passes was held to be only a procedural defect that could not defeat refund entitlement. The refund claim was therefore not barred by limitation on that ground. The document also notes that assessment could remain provisional until approval of the revised classification list, and that approval point was treated as controlling. On these principles, the appellate relief granting refund was sustained and the assessee's position was accepted.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the refund claim could be rejected as time-barred on the ground that the gate passes were not endorsed with particulars of payment of duty under protest despite an earlier protest letter filed with the department. (ii) Whether the assessment could be treated as provisional until approval of the revised classification list.

Issue (i): Whether the refund claim could be rejected as time-barred on the ground that the gate passes were not endorsed with particulars of payment of duty under protest despite an earlier protest letter filed with the department.

Analysis: The filing of the protest letter with the department was treated as the mandatory and substantive compliance. Non-endorsement of the gate passes was regarded as only procedural and incapable of defeating the protest already lodged.

Conclusion: The refund claim could not be denied as time-barred for want of endorsement on the gate passes, and the finding was in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the assessment could be treated as provisional until approval of the revised classification list.

Analysis: The approval of the classification list was treated as the point up to which the assessment remained provisional, and that view was supported by the precedent relied upon.

Conclusion: The assessment was held to be provisional till approval of the classification list, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the refund relief granted by the appellate authority was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A timely protest letter filed with the department satisfies the substantive requirement for duty paid under protest, and a mere failure to endorse the supporting documents does not defeat refund entitlement; where classification approval is pending, the assessment may be treated as provisional until such approval.

---