Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2008 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (9) TMI 332 - AT - Central ExciseFinalization of provisional assessment - . Despite the knowledge that duty was being paid on provisional basis no attempt was made by the department to pass a provisional assessment order or insist on furnishing of bond/bank guarantee as required. - Apex Court in the case of Metal Forgings v. UOI and CCE v. Hindustan National Glass & Indus. Ltd. have clearly held that there has to be an order of provisional assessment under Rule 9B, only then the department can finalize the assessment and demand excess duty - In any case, the assessee had themselves calculated the excess amount required to be paid on finalization of accounts and had paid the same - Therefore, the question of treating the clearances as provisional assessment does not arise in the present cases – demand of differential duty is not sustainable.
|