TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1048X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the date 11.07.2017 is the correct date of communication of final assessment to the appellant. The identical issue was considered by this Tribunal in the case of GAIL (INDIA) LTD. VERSUS C.C. -AHMEDABAD. [ 2023 (10) TMI 1044 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] wherein the Tribunal has held that even though the final assessment has been made but the communication of the final assessment is relevant. In the present case also, the appellant came to know about the final assessment only on 11.07.2017. Accordingly, the appeal was filed well within the time. The impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the appeals before him on merit. - HON'BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kumar, learned Superintendent (Authorized Representative) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both the sides and perusal of records, We find that no physical final assessment order was issued to the appellant.The final assessment was updated online only. Moreover, for the differential duty, the challan was generated only on 11.07.2017. In this position, we are of the view that it is 11.07.2017 when the appellant could notice the final assessment of bill of entry. Therefore, the date 11.07.2017 is the correct date of communication of final assessment to the appellant. The identical issue was considered by this Tribunal in the case of Gail India Lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... even refund arising on completion of provisional assessment shall be governed by Section 27 of the said Act. By that amendment, bar of limitation as well as unjust enrichment are enacted to the law. Therefore before 31-7-2006, the refund arising upon completion of the provisional assessments is not intended by law to undergo the test of limitation as well as unjust enrichment in terms of law laid down by the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of the present appellant reported in 2012 (282) E.L.T. 368 (Del.). Following the ratio laid down therein, appeal of the appellant is allowed and the refund is payable to the appellant . In view the above, we find that the case of the appellant is covered by the aforesaid decisions an date of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
