9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Whether the refund claimed by M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. is admissible to them. Analysis: The appeal filed by M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. raised the issue of the admissibility of a refund claimed by them. The appellant contended that the amount in question was appropriated without issuing a show cause notice and without following the principle of natural justice. They argued that the appropriation was unilateral and violated Sections 59 and 60 of the Indian Contract Act. The appellant also highlighted that the deposit made by them was towards confirmed demands and pending appeals, and there was no justification for recovering the disputed amount. They emphasized that no adjudication order had been passed demanding the amount, and therefore, it was not recoverable. The appellant relied on legal precedents to support their arguments, including the requirement of a proper adjudication order and the futility of considering every communication as a show cause notice. In response, the Department argued that the appropriation of the amount was based on an appealable order, and since no appeal was filed by the appellant, the refund claim was rightly rejected. They cited legal precedents emphasizing that orders, even if flawed, stand unless set aside by the proper appellate authority. The Department also contended that the appellant could not claim a refund based on a decision in another person's case and that the appellant had not followed the proper procedure to challenge the appropriation of the amount. After considering both sides' submissions, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the amount in question had been appropriated without a proper demand or adjudication order as required by law. The Tribunal emphasized the mandatory requirement of issuing a show cause notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and held that the letter intimating the appropriation could not be equated with an order necessitating an appeal. The Tribunal also noted that the deposit made by the appellant was under protest and not linked to any specific pending demand. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and holding that the refund claim could not be disallowed.
|
