9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 707X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issed - decided against appellant. - E/1003/2009 - 22915/2017 - Dated:- 27-11-2017 - Shri S.S. Garg, Judicial Member None - For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, AR - For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S. GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 3.8.2009 passed by the Commissioner (A), whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he refund claim with the Department. The department noticed that the subject goods were cleared by declaring the correct value under Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944, the goods were assessed under self-assessment procedure by the appellant as per Section 11B, the refund claim filed by the appellant for the period 1999-2001 was time barred. After following the due process of law, the adjudicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... list of all the three oil companies were provisional, which is mentioned in the purchase order also. The appellant has stated that the refund claims were filed after finalisation as there is no correspondence in this behalf as stated by the learned Commissioner (A). It is further stated that the prices being contracted one there is no need for provisional assessment and limitation stipulated in Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und in this case was filed almost after a lapse of four years from the date of finalisation of the provisional price of the subject goods. In support of his submission, he relied upon the following decisions: i. MRF Ltd.: 1997 (92) ELT 309 (SC) ii. Mauria Udyog Ltd.: 2007 (207) ELT 31 (P H) iii. Mauria Udyog Ltd.: 2008 (221) ELT A120 (SC) iv. Maharashtra Cylinders Pvt. Lt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
