2005 (10) TMI 322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... preferred this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein the Respondent s appeal was allowed. 2. The relevant facts in the case for consideration are that the Respondents were directed by the authorities below to deposit an amount of Rs. 18,154/- as duty against the show cause notice issued which the Respondent did so by debiting the amount in RG 23A Part-II, UNDER PROTEST .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ble Tribunal in the case of Commissioner v. Abhideep Chemicals Private Limited - 2002 (143) E.L.T. 70 (Tribunal - Mumbai) held that duty paid while filing appeal to contest liability is payment of duty under protest and refund not hit by normal limitation period by relied upon Para. 83 of Apex Court judgment in Mafatlal Industries - 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.), holding that it is difficult to im .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 994 and the Appellant has filed the refund claim on 14-8-1994, thus I hold refund claim was filed within six months hence, refund of duty paid against demand which has subsequently gone in their favour, is refundable to the Appellant. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid discussion, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. It can be seen that the said order of the Commissioner (Appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X