Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2006 (11) TMI 225

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f record? 2.Whether the corrigendum of the nature under challenge could be made without notice to the assessee?" 3.These questions have arisen in the circumstances that the petitioner is engaged in processing of textiles and he also is engaged in processing of textiles as job work. The provisional assessment order was passed by the adjudicating authority for the period March 2001 to February 2002 and the Excise Duty on the basis of provisional assessment was paid which included the Modvat credit availed by the assessed. 4.Thereafter the assessment order was finalised vide order dated 31st Dec., 2002. With the final assessment order two charts were annexed. Chart A showing the excess central Excise Duty paid by the assessee amountin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ltd., Dohad Road, BANSWARA. Copy to the Superintendent, Central excise Range, Banswara for information and necessary action. He is requested to again check the figures/dates with related documents submitted by M/s Banswara Textile Mills Ltd. And if there is any discrepancy then inform the undersigned. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER" 6.Along with this order revised Charts A and B were annexed. 7.It is common ground that the aforesaid order was passed without notice to the assessee. 8.The assessee challenged this order. The Revenue defended the order inter alia on the ground that this was merely a correction of arithmetic mistake and the increased demand of excess deemed credit raised by the corrigendum was directed to be reversed.....