Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, on finalisation of provisional assessment, excess excise duty paid on some clearances could be adjusted against short payment determined for the same period, and whether the Revenue's demand for differential duty was sustainable.
Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the question was no longer res integra and that later decisions had departed from the earlier view in Excel Rubber Ltd. and followed the principle laid down by the Karnataka High Court in Toyota Kirloskar Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal also noticed subsequent Tribunal decisions holding that, for provisional assessment, the total duty payable on all clearances for the relevant period must be considered together, and only the net shortfall, if any, can be demanded. On that basis, the earlier contrary view was treated as having no relevance on the facts before it, and no reason was found to deviate from the settled line of authority.
Conclusion: The adjustment of excess duty paid against short payment arising on finalisation of provisional assessment was held to be permissible, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: On finalisation of provisional assessment, the duty liability for the entire period must be netted off against duty already paid, and only any remaining shortfall can be recovered.