https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343946 Refund of duty paid during pending litigation was treated as payment under protest, so the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act did not apply. The authority also could not partly deny the refund on a ground not stated in the show cause notice, because the proposed rejection was confined to limitation. As the refund application was filed after the final judicial outcome in favour of the assessee, the deposit was treated as money lying with the Government and interest became payable after three months from the refund application date under Section 11BB read with Section 83 of the Finance Act. Refund was admissible and interest on delayed refund followed. en-us Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Nov 2017 16:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343946 Refund of duty paid during pending litigation was treated as payment under protest, so the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act did not apply. The authority also could not partly deny the refund on a ground not stated in the show cause notice, because the proposed rejection was confined to limitation. As the refund application was filed after the final judicial outcome in favour of the assessee, the deposit was treated as money lying with the Government and interest became payable after three months from the refund application date under Section 11BB read with Section 83 of the Finance Act. Refund was admissible and interest on delayed refund followed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343946