https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448318 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals and remanding the case to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision within two months. It held that the appellant was entitled to a refund of excess duty paid due to a price variation clause in the contract, regardless of not opting for provisional assessment. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant had submitted necessary documents, which were overlooked, and directed a fair hearing with the opportunity for the appellant to provide additional information. en-us Wed, 27 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448318 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals and remanding the case to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision within two months. It held that the appellant was entitled to a refund of excess duty paid due to a price variation clause in the contract, regardless of not opting for provisional assessment. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant had submitted necessary documents, which were overlooked, and directed a fair hearing with the opportunity for the appellant to provide additional information. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448318