https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104833 Where duty was paid under valid protest and the assessment remained provisional, the majority held that the six-month limitation under Section 11B did not bar the refund claim, so the limitation objection failed. However, refund could not be granted finally without examining whether the duty burden had been passed on, and the matter was remanded to the original authority for inquiry into unjust enrichment with opportunity to adduce evidence. The dissent took the view that the protest related only to valuation, applied Section 11B, and would have rejected the claim. en-us Thu, 03 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:02:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104833 Where duty was paid under valid protest and the assessment remained provisional, the majority held that the six-month limitation under Section 11B did not bar the refund claim, so the limitation objection failed. However, refund could not be granted finally without examining whether the duty burden had been passed on, and the matter was remanded to the original authority for inquiry into unjust enrichment with opportunity to adduce evidence. The dissent took the view that the protest related only to valuation, applied Section 11B, and would have rejected the claim. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104833