2001 (3) TMI 129 - AT - Central Excise

Supreme Court clarifies on provisional duty payments under Central Excise Rules

In a recent case, a six-Member Bench clarified that the Supreme Court's decision in Samrat International allows for provisional duty payments without ... Provisional assessment Issues involved: Interpretation of the Supreme Court judgment in Samrat International Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise regarding provisional assessment of duty and the applicability of Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.Summary:1. Larger Bench Decision:A Larger Bench of five Members held that the Supreme Court's decision in Samrat International applies to cases of demand as well as refund, emphasizing the need for compliance with Rule 9B for provisional assessments.2. Doubt Raised by Two-Member Bench:A subsequent Bench doubted the necessity of following Rule 9B for provisional assessments, leading to a reference to a still Larger Bench for reconsideration.3. Six-Member Bench Decision:The issue before the six-Member Bench was whether the Supreme Court's decision in Samrat International allows for provisional assessment of duty without strict adherence to Rule 9B.4. Analysis of Rule 9B:Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules provides for the procedure of making provisional assessments, with duty payment being considered provisional if this rule is followed.5. Supreme Court's Interpretation:In the Samrat International case, the Supreme Court deemed duty payment as provisional even without strict compliance with Rule 9B, emphasizing the provisional nature of payments made during the interim period of classification list approval.6. Coastal Gases Case:In the Coastal Gases case, the Court reiterated the provisional nature of duty payment during the interim period, subject to the final approval of the concerned officer.7. Conclusion of the Six-Member Bench:The six-Member Bench concluded that Samrat International allows for provisional duty payments pending classification list approval, without the strict requirement of following Rule 9B. The observation by the Larger Bench regarding the necessity of Rule 9B compliance for provisional assessments was deemed unnecessary in such cases.