TMI Blog1984 (8) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. ORDER The material facts in this proceeding, before the Government of India, transferred to the Tribunal and heard as an Appeal in terms of Section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the Act, for short), are - (a) alleging an erroneous refund of ₹ 50,696.23 on or about 19-4-1977, in consequence of the Appellant s failure to pass on the benefit of exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rms of the aforesaid Notification notwithstanding the approval of certain price lists filed by the Appellant earlier. The said price lists do not reflect the reduced price resulting from availing of the exemption. It was at the price approved that the goods were sold and not the reduced price in terms of the aforesaid Notification. Accordingly, the assessable value notwithstanding the applicabilit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in question. This would imply, necessarily, an increase in the assessable value as determined originally after taking into account the benefit of the Notification of exemption in question. Since the price is to be reduced by a lesser amount to arrive at the assessable value. Consequently duty has to be necessarily paid on the increased assessable value. 3. Seeing that the aforesaid provision m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... But the question is if the proceedings had become final in this case. As would appear from a recital of the facts, the refund made earlier was put in issue in an appropriate proceeding within the limitation prescribed and that proceeding was pending when the Amending Act (Finance Act, 1982) came into force with retrospective effect. It is futile in the circumstances, to contend that there is any r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
