TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-4-97 to 16-2-98 was barred by limitation. He also rejected the claim in respect of supplies made to IOCL for the period 1-1-2001 to 31-3-2001 on the ground that the assessment in respect of supplies made to IOC was yet to be finalized. – Commissioner (appeals) allowed the refund in both the situation - Held that: - The procedure prescribed for the purpose of provisional assessment in terms of Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 Clause. The respondent filed refund claim of Rs. 19,24,782/- for the period from 1-4-1997 to 31-3-2001. The original authority by his order dated 29-3-04, taking into account that the respondents a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 provisional assessment under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. He also submits that the party has claimed that there was a clerical mistake and the claim made by them should be treated as Rs. 21,05, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot 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 so far as it relates to allowing the refund for the period from 1-4-1997 to 16-4-1998 is set aside and order of the original authority in this regard is restored. 6.2 As regards the order of the Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
