Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1984 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1984 (8) TMI 341 - AT - Central Excise

Issues:
1. Refund claim rejection based on limitation under Central Excise Rules, 1944.
2. Provisional assessment leading to a refund claim dispute.
3. Interpretation of time-limit for refund claims under Rule 11 and Rule 173J.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a refund claim rejection by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Madras I Division citing limitation under Rule 11 read with Rule 173J of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras upheld this rejection, stating that the excess payment claimed was a separate issue, despite previous approvals and finalizations. The appellant appealed to the Tribunal seeking refund.

2. The appellant argued that the assessment of packed oil was done provisionally based on communications from the department, and finalization occurred later. The provisional assessment was due to pricing valuation issues, not the manner of deriving assessable value. The Senior Departmental Representative referenced a previous Tribunal decision, emphasizing that provisional assessment on one issue does not prevent time-bar for claims on other issues. The appellant distinguished this by highlighting the provisional nature of the assessment in their case.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the provisional assessment in detail, emphasizing that once an assessment is deemed provisional, it remains so entirely until finalization based on departmental and assessee claims. They differentiated between provisional assessments and those against which protests were made. The Tribunal ruled that the time-limit for limitation under Rule 11 and Rule 173J starts from the finalization date by the department. As the claim was filed before finalization, it was deemed valid, and the refund was granted based on this interpretation.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the previous rejection and granting the refund claim based on the provisional assessment nature and the timing of the claim filing vis-a-vis finalization.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates