Provisional assessment requires a formal order and provisional duty payment; absent both, the extended limitation period cannot be invoked.

Provisional assessment under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires both a formal order of provisional assessment and payment of duty on a provisional basis; neither a filed price list nor annexures is enough. On the record, there was no material showing provisional assessment, and the show cause notice proceeded on misdeclaration and misstatement rather than provisional clearance. The clearances were therefore not treated as provisional, so the extended period of limitation could not be invoked on that footing. The demand was time-barred and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the clearances during the period of dispute were provisional so as to sustain invocation of the extended period of limitation.

Analysis: The valuation dispute was decided in favour of the Revenue, but the only live controversy was the nature of the assessments. The record disclosed no formal order of provisional assessment under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and no material showing that duty had been paid on a provisional basis. The mere fact that price lists or annexures had been filed did not establish provisional assessment. In the absence of the essential ingredients of provisional assessment, the assessee could not be treated as having been finally assessed provisionally. The show cause notice had also proceeded on misdeclaration and misstatement, not on provisional assessment.

Conclusion: The assessments were not provisional and the extended period of limitation could not be invoked on that basis. The demand was therefore time-barred and the Revenue failed on the issue.

Final Conclusion: The order holding the demand time-barred was sustained and the Revenue's challenge did not succeed.

Ratio Decidendi: Provisional assessment requires both an order under Rule 9B and payment of duty on a provisional basis; absent these essentials, the extended period cannot be justified on the footing that the clearances were provisionally assessed.

---