2017 (12) TMI 1432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of the goods determined on the basis of CAS-4 certificates, issued by the Cost Accountant. Since the assessable value of goods being cleared to their own sister concern could not be determined at the time of clearance of goods, provisional assessment was resorted to. The dispute in the present case relates to finalisation of provisional assessment for the year 2001-02. At the time of finalisation of the provisional assessment, the original authority came to the conclusion that an additional duty amounting to Rs. 4,44,865/- was required to be paid by the appellant for part of the period but at the same time, there was an excess payment made during certain other period of the year to the extent of Rs. 29,45,016/-. Both the authorities below....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... learned AR for the Department justified the impugned order. It is his submission that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the Toyota Kirloskar case was dealing with the question of liability to pay interest on the shortfall found during provisional assessment. He further submitted that the decision of the Karnataka High Court nowhere grants adjustment to such excess payment paid with the short paid duty. He further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Adison and Company Ltd. [2017-TlOL-192-SC-CX-LB]. He submitted that the apex court has made it absolutely clear in the above decision that it is only the ultimate person who bore the burden of duty who will be entitled to the claim of refund. In the ....