https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438571 A demand-cum-show-cause notice under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as time-barred where it was issued beyond six months and did not allege fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. The rebate order's reference to provisional allowance did not amount to a provisional assessment in the legal sense, because the statutory conditions for provisional assessment under Rule 9B were not shown to exist. On that basis, the demand could not be saved by limitation or sustained as consequential proceedings, and the impugned demand and appellate orders were set aside with refund directed according to law. en-us Wed, 31 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jun 2023 12:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438571 A demand-cum-show-cause notice under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as time-barred where it was issued beyond six months and did not allege fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. The rebate order's reference to provisional allowance did not amount to a provisional assessment in the legal sense, because the statutory conditions for provisional assessment under Rule 9B were not shown to exist. On that basis, the demand could not be saved by limitation or sustained as consequential proceedings, and the impugned demand and appellate orders were set aside with refund directed according to law. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438571