Cce vs Mutual Industries on 1 September, 1998
5. According to Shri K. Srivastav, SDR, it was unnecessary remand the aspect of time bar since the refund claim till 13.9.1989 was clearly barred by time. The. answer of the respondent is that in view of the price variation clause in the contract, the approval of prices declared in the earlier price lists must be regarded as provisional and therefore the time limit of 6 months will not apply. Respondent placed reliance on the decision in Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. v. Collector of C. Ex., New Delhi, . It is open to the adjudicating authority to consider this aspect also.