TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (11) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. - The matter is before us upon remand by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Order C.A. No. 7090 of 2000 of 13-1-2003. This case was decided along with a batch of cases reported in 2003 (152) E.L.T. 39 (S.C.). We have heard both sides and perused records. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that, while show cause n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l for the assessee is that in the absence of any order under Rule 9B, assessments and payment of duty cannot be treated as provisional. He has relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Metal Forgings v. Union of India reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. 241 (S.C.) in this connection. 3. A perusal of the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court, in particular, Para 12 which is reproduced below, makes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same, we cannot accept the argument of the Revenue that in fact the order of the Assistant Collector dated 21-1-1976 is a provisional order based on which clearance was made by the appellants or that they paid duty on that basis. On the contrary, as held by the Judicial Member the said order of classification was a final order, therefore, the Revenue cannot contend the limitation prescribed under ....