https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87307 Excise duty paid under an express protest communicated to the department at the time of payment was treated as compliant with Rule 233B, so the refund claim was not time-barred. The absence of endorsements on gate passes and monthly returns was held immaterial on the facts, because the goods had been removed without those documents and the protest letter, read with the challenge to the demand order before the Tribunal, sufficiently established protest. The operative principle is that strict non-endorsement formalities do not defeat compliance where the factual record otherwise shows a clear protest at the time of payment. en-us Wed, 01 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Sep 2011 11:39:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87307 Excise duty paid under an express protest communicated to the department at the time of payment was treated as compliant with Rule 233B, so the refund claim was not time-barred. The absence of endorsements on gate passes and monthly returns was held immaterial on the facts, because the goods had been removed without those documents and the protest letter, read with the challenge to the demand order before the Tribunal, sufficiently established protest. The operative principle is that strict non-endorsement formalities do not defeat compliance where the factual record otherwise shows a clear protest at the time of payment. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 01 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87307