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

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (5) TMI 386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s are engaged in the manufacture of glass bottles. For the period 1982-83 to 1987-88 provisional assessments were made pending approval of assessable value. Under order dated 22-6-90 the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division III finalized provisional assessment demanding differential duty of about Rs. 22.46 lakhs. The assessee filed an appeal and application for stay before the Commissioner (Appeals) who by order dated 12-4-91 directed pre-deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs, the assessee complied with the order. On 25-11-92 the Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of the appeal setting aside the order-in-original and remanding the matter for re-adjudication. By order dated 21-1-94 the Assistant Commissioner passed fresh order confirming a demand .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Commissioner (Appeals) also placed reliance the appellant would contend that any amount deposited towards duty provisionally during the provisional assessment proceedings will not be governed by Section 11A or 11B. The refund of Rs.15 lakhs as pre-deposit was denied to assessee on the ground that the Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 22-3-94 after the remand by the Commissioner (Appeals) had adjusted the amount of duty towards duty demand. The learned Counsel for the appellant points out that the above order dated 22-3-94 was set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) by his order dated 29-7-94 which was later affirmed by this Tribunal as well as the Supreme Court. Under these circumstances, the pre-deposit continues to be pre-deposi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as mentioned above. 6. As far as amount of Rs. 3,35,026/- is concerned there is no dispute that this amount was paid towards duty provisionally during the provisional assessment proceedings. In Mafatlal Industries Ltd., the Apex Court has held that payment of duty during provisional assessment will not be subjected to the provisions contained under Sections 11A and 11B. The relevant portion is quoted below : - "95. Rule 9B provides for provisional assessment in situations specified in Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-rule (1). The goods provisionally assessed under sub-rule (1) may be cleared for home consumption or export in the same manner as the goods which are finally assessed. Sub-rule (5) provides that 'when the duty leviable on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates