9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. These appeals at the instance of the assessee arise out of a common order 18-3-2002 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Bhopal vide Order-in-Appeal Nos. 273-74-CE/BPL/2002. 2. The appellants are having a tanning plant at Dewas where they manufactured finished leather, leather garments and leather foo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - and Rs. 8,427/-. These applications were rejected by the Assistant Commissioner vide separate orders dated 28-9-92 mainly on the ground that since the appellants had not filed appeal against the approval of price lists, refund claims were not maintainable. Aggrieved by these orders, the appellant filed two appeals before the Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, Indore. These two appeals were dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 1988 (38) E.L.T. 571. 3. The appellate authority, therefore, took the view that the order passed by the Assistant Collector rejecting the refund claim has to be set aside. Reference was also made to the fact that the duty was paid under protest contrary to the finding of the Assistant Collector. For these reasons the appellate authority set aside the order of the Assistant C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed price list so as to enable it to seek a refund of duty. As mentioned earlier in the orders passed on 19-8-93 the Commissioner (Appeals) had taken a definite view that it is not necessary for the appellants to challenge the approved price list for seeking refund of the duty paid under protest. The learned DR may be justified in contending that the above view is not in consonance with the ratio o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
