2018 (12) TMI 1474

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the period from July 2005 to March 2006, the appellant had cleared lubricating oil to their various depots/C&F agents, discharging duty on the transaction value arrived in accordance with Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The said goods were cleared to their depots on stock transfer basis and later sold at a higher price in comparison to the price at which duty was discharged at the factory gate. The appellant later filed a refund claim of Rs. 10,79,333/- on 13.11.2006 indicating that for the period July 2005 to March 2006, there was short payment of duty of Rs. 6,44,517/-. Hence, the same should be adjusted against the refund claim being filed for the excess amount of duty paid during the rel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s short paid, which they requested to be adjusted against the refund claim filed subsequently. It is his contention that even though the original authority in para 8 of the order dated 2.9.2008 categorically held that the assessment was provisional, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in para 6 recorded that since the appellant had not followed the procedure prescribed, therefore, the assessment cannot be considered as provisional. Hence, the duty short paid during the relevant period cannot be adjusted against the duty excess paid. 3.1 The learned Chartered Accountant further submitted that in all their ER-1 returns, they disclosed to the department that assessment was provisional. Therefore, the finding of the learned Commissioner (Appe....