TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal upholds Collector's decision on rebate claims, citing provisional nature of sanction & prospective application.</h1> <h3>CAWNPORE SUGAR WORKS LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF C. EX., ALLAHABAD</h3> The Tribunal upheld the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) decision to disallow rebate claims for the period before the amendment, citing the ... Sugar - Excess production rebate on sugar - Refund Issues:- Appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Allahabad regarding a rebate claim under Notification No. 132/82, dated 21-4-1982 as amended by Notification No. 193/82, dated 11-6-1982.- Disallowance of rebate for the period prior to the amended notification.- Contention of provisional sanction of rebate by Assistant Collector.- Arithmetical errors in the calculations of the rebate claim.- Interpretation of provisional assessment in relation to rebate sanction.- Applicability of the amended notification prospectively.Analysis:The appeal was made against the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) regarding a rebate claim under specific notifications. The Assistant Collector had partially allowed the claim post the amended notification, disallowing the rebate for the period before the amendment. The appellant contended that the rebate should have been sanctioned finally, pointing out arithmetical errors. The Departmental Representative argued that the rebate was correctly granted post the amendment, emphasizing the provisional nature of the sanction.Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal rejected the argument that rebate sanction needed finalization to conclude the matter. The legal provisions distinguish between provisional assessment and refund/rebate limitations. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had not raised the provisional nature of the sanction before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), and previous decisions on provisional assessment limitations were deemed irrelevant to the present case.The Tribunal referenced past cases to support the decision to limit the rebate sanction to the period after the amendment, as the benefit of the amendment applied prospectively. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the Collector (Appeals) order, citing relevant case law and upholding the decision to reject the appeal. The appeal was ultimately rejected based on the above analysis and legal interpretations.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
