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

2024 (4) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty allowing refund claims of the excess duty paid on account of subsequent negotiation of the sale price from depots, observed Allowing refund in these cases amounts to reassessment of goods, which were already assessed finally by the respondent at the time of clearance of goods from factory. The refund amount is determined and sanctioned without any authority of law. The observation of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is in line with the opinion expressed by this Tribunal in the case of Finolex Cables Ltd. [ 2011 (3) TMI 414 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] wherein it is held that In the instant case, the appellant-assessee has discharged duty liability accordingly. Subsequent change in prices effected by the appellant at the depot does not affect the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s were assessed and cleared following Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. Consequently, they filed refund claim for Rs.4,57,677/- for the period April 2008 to June 2008 on 29.04.2009 and Rs.1,67,967/- for the period July 2008 to September 2008 on 10.06.2009. After considering the claims, the adjudicating authority has sanctioned the same to the appellant. Aggrieved by the said orders, the Revenue preferred appeals before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) who in turn allowed their appeals by setting aside the orders passed by the adjudicating authority. Hence, the assesse is in appeal. 3. At the outset, the learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that even though at the ti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. It is her contention that subsequent negotiation of the prices cannot be the basis for reopening the assessment. In support, he has referred to the judgement of this Tribunal in the case of Finolex Cables Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-l: 2011 (270) E.L.T. 81 (Tri. Mumbai) and the judgment of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore vs Vishnulakshmi Mills (P) Ltd.: 2014 (302) E.L.T. 339 (Mad.) and CCE, Raipur vs. IND Synergy Ltd.: 2012 (284) ELT 448 (Tri.-Del.). 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. I find that the short issue involved in present appeal is whether refund of the excess duty claimed to have been paid by the appellant is adm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . If the respondent has any difficulty in ascertaining the normal transaction value prevailing at the depots for the purpose of payment of duty, they are at liberty to seek provisional assessment under Rule 7 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. When once the goods are cleared after assessing to duty in terms of provisions of Central Excise Act/rules, they cannot seek to revise the assessable value and it cannot be reopened. It is only in the case of assessments made provisionally the JAC can finalise the assessments on the basis of records and sanction refund, if any. 16. Allowing refund in these cases amounts to reassessment of goods, which were already assessed finally by the respondent at .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lso, the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Vishnulakshmi Mills (P) Ltd. (supra) in similar circumstances held as follows: 6. The short point arises for consideration is that whether the assessee is entitled to refund of excess duty remitted by them on the basis of the prevailing price on the same day or the subsequent day or on the later date. 7. The facts narrated by the Assessing Officer would undisputedly disclose that the basis for the refund claim made by the assessee was the prevailing price in the depots on dates latter to the dates on which goods were cleared from the factory. 8. It is not the case of the assessee that the prevailing price on the depot, which is the basis for the benefit claimed herein is the price for the da .....

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