Post-clearance price reduction does not by itself change assessable value; refund fails where provisional pricing was not raised below.

A refund claim based on a post-clearance reduction in price was untenable because the goods had been cleared on payment of excise duty and the subsequent reduction, by itself, did not alter the assessable value. The assessee also sought to rely on a different factual case, namely that the price was provisional at clearance and fixed later, but that foundation had not been raised before the lower authorities. On the record as presented, the appellate plea failed because the revised factual basis was not established.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim was maintainable on account of a price reduction said to have taken place after clearance of the excisable goods, and whether the assessee could rely on a different factual case at the appellate stage.

Analysis: The goods were cleared on payment of excise duty and the refund claim was founded on a subsequent reduction of price supported by revised invoices and credit notes. The factual basis urged in appeal, namely that the price had only been provisional at the time of clearance and was fixed later, had not been placed before the lower authorities. A subsequent reduction in price after clearance would ordinarily not affect the assessable value, whereas a later fixation of price after clearance could have a different consequence; however, that case was not established on the record before the lower authorities.

Conclusion: The refund claim was held to be untenable and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund claim based on post-clearance price reduction cannot succeed where the factual foundation for treating the clearance price as provisional was not raised before the lower authorities and the subsequent reduction, by itself, does not affect the assessable value.

---