<?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>2008 (7) TMI 277 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32608</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld remand orders directing finalization of provisional assessments before addressing refund claims for excisable goods, emphasizing the provisional nature of assessments based on price variation clauses. Precedent cases supported recognizing assessments as provisional, dismissing Revenue&#039;s appeals. Regarding LPG cylinders, assessments were deemed provisional due to price variations, requiring finalization before refund consideration. A letter against provisional assessment did not preclude refund claims, as differential duty payments post-clearance warranted refund review. The Tribunal affirmed the need to honor refund claims post-letter, dismissing appeals and emphasizing adherence to contractual obligations and past decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71247" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 277 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32608</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld remand orders directing finalization of provisional assessments before addressing refund claims for excisable goods, emphasizing the provisional nature of assessments based on price variation clauses. Precedent cases supported recognizing assessments as provisional, dismissing Revenue&#039;s appeals. Regarding LPG cylinders, assessments were deemed provisional due to price variations, requiring finalization before refund consideration. A letter against provisional assessment did not preclude refund claims, as differential duty payments post-clearance warranted refund review. The Tribunal affirmed the need to honor refund claims post-letter, dismissing appeals and emphasizing adherence to contractual obligations and past decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>