https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54813 Duty paid under contemporaneous protest was treated as a clear challenge to the assessment, so the refund claim was not barred by limitation. The text also states that a knitting machine imported under the EPCG scheme fell within the scope of Notification No. 29/97-Cus. as judicially interpreted for textile-garment manufacturing machinery, and the narrower administrative view was rejected. Refund could not be denied merely because the bill of entry assessment had not been separately challenged, since the protest showed no acquiescence. On that basis, refund was held admissible on all three issues. en-us Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:27:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54813 Duty paid under contemporaneous protest was treated as a clear challenge to the assessment, so the refund claim was not barred by limitation. The text also states that a knitting machine imported under the EPCG scheme fell within the scope of Notification No. 29/97-Cus. as judicially interpreted for textile-garment manufacturing machinery, and the narrower administrative view was rejected. Refund could not be denied merely because the bill of entry assessment had not been separately challenged, since the protest showed no acquiescence. On that basis, refund was held admissible on all three issues. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54813