https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81841 Refund of excise duty had to be claimed within the six-month period under Section 11B, and a claim filed after that period was barred and not maintainable. Rule 156B(2) could not displace the limitation because the goods were not genuinely covered by the warehousing regime, the payment was not a provisional one, and the correspondence did not amount to a valid protest. The refund was therefore governed by Section 11B, and the appellate refund order was set aside with restoration of the original rejection. en-us Wed, 08 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:12:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81841 Refund of excise duty had to be claimed within the six-month period under Section 11B, and a claim filed after that period was barred and not maintainable. Rule 156B(2) could not displace the limitation because the goods were not genuinely covered by the warehousing regime, the payment was not a provisional one, and the correspondence did not amount to a valid protest. The refund was therefore governed by Section 11B, and the appellate refund order was set aside with restoration of the original rejection. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81841