TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other registered unit of the same assessee – therefore, revenue contention that assessee has not taken Central registration u/r 6(4A) and therefore, such adjustment is not permissible, rejected - Prima facie case in assessee’s favour – stay granted - 493 of 2007 - ST/108/2009(PB) - Dated:- 2-4-2009 - Mr. M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical) and Mr. P. K. Das, Member (Judicial) Mr. G.C. Babbar, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber, they had been paying in excess. 3. The Department has taken a view that payments and dues have to be adjusted monthwise and wherever there was lower payment in the particular month compared to what was payable, they have confirmed the demand as short levy without touching upon the excess payment in other months. 4. The learned Advocate submits that for the month of March, 2005, they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssions from both the sides. Admittedly, the applicant was under provisional assessment. Present case does not involve adjustment of dues of one registered unit against another registered unit of the same assessee which appears to be the purpose of registration under Rule 6(4A). At any rate, during these six months period involved, the applicant has overall paid in excess of what was due from them. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
