https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351295 The Tribunal rejected the revenue's appeal, upholding the decision to allow the refund claim to the appellant. The dispute over the classification of "Branded Chewing Tobacco" for Central Excise duty was settled in favor of the appellant, with the Tribunal finding the demands beyond the limitation period. The appellant's refund claim, initially rejected, was allowed as the deposited amounts were considered refundable due to being paid under protest and successfully litigated. The issue of time bar for the refund claim was dismissed by the Tribunal, which found no legal basis for rejecting the refund. en-us Fri, 03 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:48:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351295 The Tribunal rejected the revenue's appeal, upholding the decision to allow the refund claim to the appellant. The dispute over the classification of "Branded Chewing Tobacco" for Central Excise duty was settled in favor of the appellant, with the Tribunal finding the demands beyond the limitation period. The appellant's refund claim, initially rejected, was allowed as the deposited amounts were considered refundable due to being paid under protest and successfully litigated. The issue of time bar for the refund claim was dismissed by the Tribunal, which found no legal basis for rejecting the refund. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351295