- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By the impugned order dated 22-12-1989, passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Rampur a provisional assessment was made under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (briefly) 'the Rules'.
(2.) The contention of the petitioner is that under Rule 173CC of the Rules, once a price list is submitted and an assessee is permitted to clear the goods, a provisional assessment will be deemed to have been made and no further provisional assessment can be made under Rule 9-B. In support of his contention, Shri S.N. Verma, learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on the case of Modi Xerox Limited v. Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Rampur and Anr. decided in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 660 of 1989.
(3.) The impugned order, Annexure-1 to the writ petition was passed on 22-12-1989. It is submitted by Shri Verma that enough time having elapsed final approval order, ordinarily, should have been passed by this time by the respondents and if that is passed, then the controversy whether a provisional assessment under Rule 9-B can be made or not, would come to an end. It is also submitted that for the subsequent years the respondents have already made final approval order and it is not known why the final approval order has not been made for the year in question.;