2019 (1) TMI 1166

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ajay Kumar, Additional Commissioner (AR) for respondent ORDER Per: C J Mathew M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd is in appeal against the rejection of its claim for refund of duties of central excise that had been recovered consequent upon proceedings for enhancement of assessable value in accordance with rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e to be rejected for being barred by limitation of time as the appellant had been unable to establish that the duties had been paid 'under protest.' Hence this appeal before us. 2. At the outset, Learned Counsel for appellant informs us that the appellant had been discharging its tax liability based on cost of production without adding the notional fixed percentage of profit as stipulated in ru....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er informed that a bench of the Tribunal had, vide order no. A/85173/18 dated 29th January 2018, in appeal of Revenue against the dropping of the demand by Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Zone-I, referred the matter to the Hon'ble President for constitution of a Larger Bench as the decision of the Kolkata bench, that had been relied upon for filing this refund claim as well as by the adjudi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arately in the Mumbai jurisdiction. Hence, the first appellate authority had failed to restrict the proceedings to the appeal before him. Both of these are valid grounds for setting aside the order. 5. The appellant has produced the challans pertaining to discharge of duty liability on which 'protest' has been clearly noted. There can, thus, be no doubt that the claim was not barred by limitati....