TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional and have not been finalized, the refund claim filed by the assessee was premature - Held that: - admittedly during the relevant period, the assessment were provisional. However, I find the stand of the Assistant Commissioner is self-contradictory inasmuch as on one hand he is rejecting the refund claim as premature, and on the other, he is rejecting the same on the point of limitation - The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary of M/s. Coal India Ltd. at agreed upon price. However, with effect from 1-3-2006, when their contract expired, they continue to supply the said goods at the rate of ₹ 16,700/- PMT, which was the rate agreed upon between the two, in terms of the previous contract dated 18-5-2005. 2. As there was no valid agreement between the two, the assessments were made provisional for the period Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder, Commissioner (Appeals) observed that inasmuch as the assessments were still provisional and have not been finalized, the refund claim filed by the assessee was premature. Accordingly, he rejected the appeal. 4. Hence the present appeal. 5. After hearing both the sides, I note that there is no dispute about the fact that during the relevant period the appellant applied for provisional a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment having been concluded on 17-10-2013. The appellant s apprehension that the claim may not be again rejected by the adjudicating authority on the issue of time-bar is not well-founded inasmuch as the claim is already filed and is deemed to have been pending before the original adjudicating authority and as such, there is no requirement for the assessee to file new refund claim so as to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
