https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72929 Duty paid under an express and continuing protest was treated as non-final payment, so the refund claim was not barred by limitation. The protest remained effective because the assessees consistently disputed liability, filed a revised classification list, and clearly stated that payment was made under protest; the absence of a separate challenge to the classification list did not nullify that protest. For duty paid before the amendment of Rule 11, the governing limitation provision was the unamended rule in force on the date of payment, not the amended rule or the date of the refund application. The earlier rule therefore applied to the relevant period, and the refund claim for that period remained maintainable. en-us Fri, 19 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 May 2011 18:44:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72929 Duty paid under an express and continuing protest was treated as non-final payment, so the refund claim was not barred by limitation. The protest remained effective because the assessees consistently disputed liability, filed a revised classification list, and clearly stated that payment was made under protest; the absence of a separate challenge to the classification list did not nullify that protest. For duty paid before the amendment of Rule 11, the governing limitation provision was the unamended rule in force on the date of payment, not the amended rule or the date of the refund application. The earlier rule therefore applied to the relevant period, and the refund claim for that period remained maintainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72929