1984 (8) TMI 316

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri Gopal Prasad, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Mahesh Kumar, S.D.R., for the Respondent. ORDER The material facts in this proceeding, before the Government of India, transferred to the Tribunal and heard as an Appeal in terms of Section 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the Act, for short), are - (a) alleging an erroneous refund of Rs. 50,696.23 on or about 19-4-1977,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....50,696.23 was erroneously refunded. (ii) the exemption was claimed in terms of the aforesaid Notification notwithstanding the approval of certain price lists filed by the Appellant earlier. The said price lists do not reflect the reduced price resulting from availing of the exemption. It was at the price approved that the goods were sold and not the reduced price in terms of the aforesaid Notif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ything more than such reduced quantum of duty from the normal price of the goods in question. This would imply, necessarily, an increase in the assessable value as determined originally after taking into account the benefit of the Notification of exemption in question. Since the price is to be reduced by a lesser amount to arrive at the assessable value. Consequently duty has to be necessarily pai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... construed as to enable a reopening of a case of refund that had become final. 4. But the question is if the proceedings had become final in this case. As would appear from a recital of the facts, the refund made earlier was put in issue in an appropriate proceeding within the limitation prescribed and that proceeding was pending when the Amending Act (Finance Act, 1982) came into force wi....