2006 (2) TMI 461

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner, that refund due should be paid to the assessee not as Modvat credit: but in cash. 3. The facts of the case are that, during an investigation, the respondent-assessee deposited Rs. 7 Lakh (Rs. 5 Lakh by way of cash and Rs. 2 Lakh b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the amount in cash and in the form of Cenvat Credit. The appellants are not in a position to utilise the credit already lying in their Cenvat Account and have surrendered the registration certificate on 23-9-2003. Therefore, I am of the considered view that sanctioning of refund by allowing re-credit in their Cenvat Account would not be in fair play of justice. Therefore, in view of the discuss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has also referred to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Bhopal v. Bombay Burmah Trading Coprpn. Ltd. reported in 2005 (190) E.L.T. 40 (Tribunal) = 2005 (70) R.L.T. 671 (CESTAT-DELHI) holding that the refund in such a case is admissible in cash. 6. The Commissioner's order cannot be faulted, particularly, since the original payment of Rs. 5 Lakhs was in cash. The granting of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X