https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74963 Contemporaneous correspondence, repeated objections to classification, and endorsements on gate passes can constitute a valid protest under Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, where they clearly show a continuing challenge to duty liability. On those facts, payment is treated as made under protest, so the refund claim is not barred by limitation under Section 27 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. The authorities should not ignore such protest merely because it is not expressed in a rigid formal form; limitation must be assessed in light of the substance of the objection. en-us Tue, 08 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:25:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74963 Contemporaneous correspondence, repeated objections to classification, and endorsements on gate passes can constitute a valid protest under Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, where they clearly show a continuing challenge to duty liability. On those facts, payment is treated as made under protest, so the refund claim is not barred by limitation under Section 27 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. The authorities should not ignore such protest merely because it is not expressed in a rigid formal form; limitation must be assessed in light of the substance of the objection. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 08 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74963