9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shylendra Kumar, J.]. - This is an appeal filed by the Revenue-Commissioner of Central Excise, under Section 35-C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, directed against the Order passed by the CESTAT, South Zone Bench, Bangalore, in terms of the Order No. 1154/2008, dated 24-9-2008 12009 (245) E.L.T. 413 (Tri. - Bang.)]. 2. The first adjudicating authority allowed the refund application of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -excisable product and therefore, the CENVAT credit outstanding in the name of assessee's account should be refunded. 6. The Adjudicating Officer allowed the application in part and disallowed the application in so far as the credit related to the excise duty with reference to the stock and unfinished products in the custody of the assessee. 7. Appearing on behalf of the appellant, submission of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ming that as to when exactly the duty liability arises would be a question of law and that in turn depending upon the facts and circumstance of each case and in this ease, the differential of duty liability being a meager sum of Rs. 50,000/- and that too in respect of a product on which, State did not want to levy duty after 1-3-2006, we are of the definite opinion that, this is not a matter deser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
