TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1115
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ugh Order-in-Original No.33/2006(R) dated 20.09.2006. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, for finalization of pricelists the assessments were kept pending during the period from January, 1993 to April, 1993. The pricelists were finalized on 17.04.1997. After the finalization of pricelists the assessment were finalized and 25 refund claims were allowed to the appellants and four refund claims for the period from January, 1993 to April, 1993 claiming the refund of Rs. 14,10,371/- were rejected as stated above. The appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) decided the appeal through Order-in-Appeal No. 115-CE/MRT-I/2007 dated 31.05.2007 wherein he has held that the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duty price and that they had undisputedly passed on the discount to the customers during the period from December, 1990 to April, 1993 and also submitted in their said letter that as they had not collected the cash discount amount from the customer, they had also not collected the corresponding Excise Duty amount from their customers. Further they have claimed that under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944 they are entitled for interest on the refund due from the date Section 11BB of the said Act was enacted i.e. 25.05.1995." 5. During the hearing on 15.06.2016, Revenue was requested to submit report on implementation of the order dated 17.04.1997 i.e. finalization of price list. A report in this regard was submitted by Revenue ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmissioner of C.C.E., Noida reported at 2007(210) E.L.T. 188 (S.C.) and another Supreme Court's rulings in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Indore Vs. Hindustan Lever Ltd. reported at 2000 (120) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). He has further relied on rulings by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C.C.E., Chennai Vs. T.V.S. Suzuki Ltd. reported at 2003 (156) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.) and case laws in the case of C.C.E., Mumbai Vs. Allied Photographic India Ltd. reported at 2004 (166) E.L.T. 3 (S. C.). He urged that as submitted by Revenue, the above stated refund claims were due on finalization of provisional assessment on 17.04.1997, they should have been allowed to them without their filing any refund claim of the same. He has further submitted that ap....