9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rchana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Briefly stated the facts of the case are as under : 1.1 Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of colour T.V. On 5-8-1988, applicants were directed by their Range Superintendent to deposit duty in respect of after sale service charges recovered by them from their customers. Appellants paid the amount on different dates totally amounting to Rs. 1,08,800/-. Vid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rily by the assessee. 2. Shri N.C. Ganguly, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the demands were raised by their Range Supdt. However, the said payments were made by them under protest. Subsequently, neither any show-cause notice was issued to them for confirmation of the above payments by the proper officer nor adjudication took place. As such their refund claim filed with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirming any duty has taken place subsequent to raising of demand in RT-12 returns. 4. After hearing both sides we find sufficient force in the submission of the learned Advocate. We have seen the letter dated 28-10-1988 written to the Supdt. which clearly spells out that duty is paid under protest. It also became evident from the said letter that the appellants were paying lumpsum instalment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
