https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344484 Duty paid while the levy itself was under challenge was treated as payment under protest, so the refund claim was not barred by limitation for alleged non-compliance with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal held that where the assessee was contesting the same levy for an earlier period, payment during the pendency of that challenge carried the character of protest, and the Revenue could not defeat refund solely on the basis of the formal protest procedure. The objection on limitation therefore failed, the order rejecting refund was set aside, and relief was granted to the assessee. en-us Wed, 31 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Aug 2017 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344484 Duty paid while the levy itself was under challenge was treated as payment under protest, so the refund claim was not barred by limitation for alleged non-compliance with Rule 233B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal held that where the assessee was contesting the same levy for an earlier period, payment during the pendency of that challenge carried the character of protest, and the Revenue could not defeat refund solely on the basis of the formal protest procedure. The objection on limitation therefore failed, the order rejecting refund was set aside, and relief was granted to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344484