https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84495 Duty was treated as paid under protest only from the date the protest letter was filed, because the essential requirement was clear filing of a letter expressing the assessee's intention to protest. The record did not support a finding that the duty was under protest from 20-11-1980, and the protest letter was stated to have been delivered on 24-10-1981. Even if Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not fully complied with, payment could still be regarded as under protest from the date of filing of the protest letter. The order was modified to reflect that the protest commenced only on 24-10-1981. en-us Wed, 08 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jul 2011 12:53:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84495 Duty was treated as paid under protest only from the date the protest letter was filed, because the essential requirement was clear filing of a letter expressing the assessee's intention to protest. The record did not support a finding that the duty was under protest from 20-11-1980, and the protest letter was stated to have been delivered on 24-10-1981. Even if Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was not fully complied with, payment could still be regarded as under protest from the date of filing of the protest letter. The order was modified to reflect that the protest commenced only on 24-10-1981. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84495