https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72600 Refund of differential central excise duty on Vitamin Premix was treated as admissible from the date the classification list claiming Tariff Item 68 was filed and later approved, with no reason to deny it effect from 9-3-1981. The assessee had paid duty in full, so provisional assessment and bond requirements under Rule 173-B(2-A) read with Rule 9-B were not necessary. Protest endorsements and letters to the department supported the claim. Rule 233-B, effective from 1-6-1981, did not defeat the substantial claim after 9-6-1981, though the short interval from 1-6-1981 to 9-6-1981 was treated as defective. Limitation under Section 11B did not bar the admissible portion. en-us Mon, 20 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 May 2011 16:59:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72600 Refund of differential central excise duty on Vitamin Premix was treated as admissible from the date the classification list claiming Tariff Item 68 was filed and later approved, with no reason to deny it effect from 9-3-1981. The assessee had paid duty in full, so provisional assessment and bond requirements under Rule 173-B(2-A) read with Rule 9-B were not necessary. Protest endorsements and letters to the department supported the claim. Rule 233-B, effective from 1-6-1981, did not defeat the substantial claim after 9-6-1981, though the short interval from 1-6-1981 to 9-6-1981 was treated as defective. Limitation under Section 11B did not bar the admissible portion. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72600