2011 (9) TMI 178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sional assessment, the appellant was directed to prefer a claim for refund in terms of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and when the refund claim was processed a discrepancy was noticed in the turnover tax element - Hence a show-cause notice was issued and the demand raised against the appellant - Therefore, there is no merit in the challenge by the appellants and the appellants had not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... missioner vide order dated 9.4.2001. However, on verification it was found that they had claimed turn over tax provisionally at the time of clearances from the factory which was in excess of what was incurred by them as the excess value was not added to the assessable value while finalizing the provisional assessment thereby resulting in short-payment of duty of Rs.2,17,868/-. The show-cause notic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... epancy was noticed in the turnover tax element. Hence a show-cause notice was issued and the demand raised against the appellant. Therefore, as correctly held by the lower appellate authority, there is no merit in the challenge by the appellants and the appellants had not given any satisfactory reason for the turn over tax claimed by them in excess. In this view of the matter, we see no reason to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X