Limited, refunds on finalisation of the provisional
assessment accrued to the assessee therein in the
year 1996 and the refund was claimed by making an
application on July 5, 1996, that is, prior to the
amendment of Section 11B on August 1, 1998. However,
the said application was not disposed off. In that
case, the contention of the Revenue was that during
the pendency of the claim for refund dated July 5,
1996, the amendment to Rule 9B(5) had come in to
force with effect from June 25, 1999 and, therefore,
the pending refund application dated July 5, 1996 has
to be decided as per the amended Rule 9B(5). In that
context, the Apex Court in the case of TVS Suzuki
Limited held that merely because the departmental
authorities took a long time to process the
application for refund, the right of the assessee
therein does not get defeated by the subsequent
amendment to Rule 9B(5). Thus, in the case of TVS
Suzuki Limited (supra) refund on finalisation of the
provisional assessment had accrued to the assessee
therein, prior to the amendment of Section 11B on
August 1, 1998, where as, in the present case, refund
on finalisation of the provisional assessment accrued
to the assessee after August 1, 1998. Moreover, in
the case of TVS Suzuki Limited, the Apex Court was
not called upon to consider the scope and effect of
the amendment to Section 11B with effect from August
