Provisional assessment under central excise rules requires Rule 9B compliance; a Rule 173C(11) assessment does not extend rebate limitation.

A mere assessment under Rule 173C(11) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 does not constitute a provisional assessment unless the procedure under Rule 9B is satisfied, including execution of the prescribed bond and the existence of circumstances justifying provisional determination. Because no bond was executed and the conditions for provisional assessment were not shown, the assessment did not attract Explanation B(e) to Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The rebate claim therefore could not be saved from limitation and remained time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether an assessment made under Rule 173C(11) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 amounts to a provisional assessment so as to attract Explanation B(e) to Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and save the rebate claim from limitation.

Analysis: Rule 173C(11) dispenses with filing of a price list, but it does not by itself create a provisional assessment. Provisional assessment under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires compliance with the prescribed procedure, including execution of a bond and the existence of circumstances justifying provisional determination. No such bond was executed and the conditions necessary for provisional assessment were not shown to exist. On the facts, the claim could not be brought within the protective ambit of Explanation B(e) to Section 11B.

Conclusion: The assessment was not provisional, the rebate claim remained time-barred, and the contention based on Explanation B(e) failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A mere assessment under Rule 173C(11) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 does not amount to a provisional assessment unless the statutory requirements of Rule 9B are satisfied.

---