TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowing the adjustment of excess duty paid against the demand is proper because goods were cleared under provisional assessment before the introduction of Rule 9B (5), since unjust enrichment is not applicable during that period - E/983/2000/MAS - 46/2008 - Dated:- 22-1-2008 - S/Shri P.G. CHACKO, Member (J) and P. KARTHIKEYAN, Member (T) [Order Per P. KARTHIKEYAN, MEMBER (T)]-1. This is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The Revenue has challenged the impugned order as regards "interest on receivables" on the ground that abatement was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) following the decision of the WRB of the Tribunal in the case of P.M.P Auto Industries dated 7/21.6.1999 [2002] (147) E.L.T. 1240 (Tribunal) and that the same had been appealed against before the Suprem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issues relating to M/s. Raptakos Brett Co for whom the appellants herein manufactured "P or P medicines" as a loan licensee were decided for the previous period. In the above final order it was held that interest on receivables was not to be included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured and cleared by the assessee. Ld. SDR submits that the appeal filed by the Revenue against M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... curred when the goods were cleared under provisional assessment before the Central Excise Rule 9B (5) was enacted making the unjust enrichment aspect applicable to refunds sanctioned on finalization of provisional assessment. Therefore we find that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing the adjustment of excess duty paid against the demand is proper and does not call for any interferenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
