TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (6) TMI 347
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the common Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the impugned order, certain deductions were disallowed by the Revenue while arriving at the assessable value of the goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant. 3. The contention of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....preme Court in the case of CCE v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.). 5. The contention of the Revenue is that Section 11A provides recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid, as the case may be, was on the basis of any approval, acceptance or assessment relating to the rate of duty on or valuation of excisable goods. The Revenue rel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hout reviewing that order of assessment, the duty cannot be demanded for the same period. The reliance of appellant on the decision of Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the case. In this case the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that without challenging the assessment order, the assessee cannot file refund claim by challenging the assessment in the refund claim. The Hon'b....