<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (2) TMI 360 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117450</link>
    <description>Clearances made on provisional prices, with the department informed of retrospective price revision and differential duty paid on upward revisions, are to be treated as provisional assessments. In that situation, the assessment does not become final merely because no bond was executed under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules. The limitation bar applicable to final assessments therefore does not defeat a refund claim arising from downward price revision, and the refund is not time barred. The assessee remains entitled to refund with consequential relief where the price variation arrangement was disclosed and accepted in practice by the department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2024 13:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 360 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117450</link>
      <description>Clearances made on provisional prices, with the department informed of retrospective price revision and differential duty paid on upward revisions, are to be treated as provisional assessments. In that situation, the assessment does not become final merely because no bond was executed under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules. The limitation bar applicable to final assessments therefore does not defeat a refund claim arising from downward price revision, and the refund is not time barred. The assessee remains entitled to refund with consequential relief where the price variation arrangement was disclosed and accepted in practice by the department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>