9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (2) TMI 539X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er]. - Heard both sides and perused the record. 2. The dispute is about eligibility of the appellant for interest. 3. The material facts may be noted. On 9-9-96, the Assistant Commissioner held that appellant was not eligible for certain amount which had been taken as Modvat credit. In compliance to that order, the appellant reversed the credit on 10-3-97 and filed appeal before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel for the appellant is that there is no difference between return of Modvat credit and duty paid in PLA and therefore, interest was rightly due. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indo-Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. and Anr. v. Union of India Ors. - 2005 (185) E.L.T. 19 (Guj.) = 2002 (82) ECC 657 in support of the appellant's claim. 5. The cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment challenged that order before the Tribunal which vide order dated 29-2-2000 upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Thereafter, the respondents instead of taking recredit in their record on the strength of the above said order of the Tribunal, suo motu, they moved an application for the refund of the amount. In that application they did not ask for the interest. They rather vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent could have suo mot taken back the reversed credit upon winning in appeal that filing of refund application was unnecessary and the respondent gave up their claim for interest, etc. the Commissioner (Appeals) could not have granted the interest claim. The judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has no application in the facts of the present case. The appeal fails and is rejected. (Dicta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
