TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the refund claim was barred by limitation when the duty had been paid under protest; (ii) Whether the matter still required examination on the question of unjust enrichment.
Issue (i): Whether the refund claim was barred by limitation when the duty had been paid under protest.
Analysis: The refund claims were rejected below as time-barred under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The payment, however, had been made under a letter of protest and acknowledged as such. The applicable scheme under Section 11B and Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 treats duty paid under protest as outside the ordinary six-month limitation. The protest was connected with the pending challenge to the earlier adjudication on the same issue, and the absence of a separate appeal against the later orders did not defeat the protection available under the protest mechanism.
Conclusion: The refund claims were not barred by limitation and the assessee succeeded on this issue.
Issue (ii): Whether the matter still required examination on the question of unjust enrichment.
Analysis: Even where limitation was saved, the entitlement to refund could not be granted finally without examining unjust enrichment in the light of the governing Supreme Court decision. The proper course was for the lower authorities to decide that aspect after giving an opportunity of hearing.
Conclusion: The issue of unjust enrichment was left for fresh determination by the lower authorities.
Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained relief on limitation and protest, but the refund entitlement remained subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment.
Ratio Decidendi: Duty paid under protest, when duly acknowledged and continued during the period for challenge, is protected from the ordinary limitation bar for refund, but final refund relief remains subject to the separate requirement of establishing that the incidence of duty was not passed on.
TaxTMI 
