9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. [Order per: M. Veeraiyan, Member (T) (Oral)]. - This is an appeal by the Department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 12-7-2004. 2. None appears for the respondents in spite of notice. Heard the learned DR. 3. The respondents were supplying LPG Cylinder to Government owned oil companies namely, HPCL, IOCL and BPCL and the purchase orders contained Price Variation Cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 31-3-2001, taking note of the fact that subsequently the assessment has been finalized on 29-3-2004, he allowed the refund claim for the said period. 5. Learned DR submits that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in allowing the refund prior to 17-4-1998 is incorrect. The Price Variation Clauses in the purchase orders placed by the buyers with the respondent cannot be treated as provisiona ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f treating assessment during the period from 1-4-1997 to 16-4-1998 as provisional assessment does not arise. The procedure prescribed for the purpose of provisional assessment in terms of Rule 9B has not been complied with for this period. Therefore, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in allowing the refund for this period is erroneous. In view of the above, the order of the Commissioner in s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod on 6-3-2003. It is also not disputed the assessment has since been finalized. Under these circumstances, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing the refund in respect of the supplies made to IOCL does not call for any interference from us, especially in the light of the fact that the assessment has since been finalized.
7. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
