Provisional assessment and short-levy rules barred differential excise duty where approvals were already completed.

Differential central excise duty could not be demanded for a past period merely because the classification list had not yet been approved. Clearances were not treated as provisional assessments in the absence of material showing compliance with Rule 9B procedure or payment on a provisional basis. Once the classification list and RT-12 returns had been assessed, a later notice could not be sustained as a short-levy demand on these facts. The demand was therefore held unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether differential central excise duty could be demanded for a past period after the classification list had been approved, and whether clearances made before such approval could be treated as provisional assessments.

Analysis: The assessment could not be treated as provisional merely because the classification list had not yet been approved. Provisional assessment requires material showing compliance with the procedure under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, or payment of duty on a provisional basis, and no such material was shown. Even otherwise, once the classification list and RT-12 returns had been assessed, the subsequent notice could not sustain a demand on the footing of short levy. The levy on the basis of an approved classification list was not a short levy in these circumstances.

Conclusion: The demand for differential duty was not sustainable and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: A demand for differential excise duty cannot be raised as a short levy after approval of the classification list unless the clearances were demonstrably made under a valid provisional assessment procedure.

---