2006 (10) TMI 297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. [Order (for the Bench)]. This appeal is preferred against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) made on 28-9-2004 upholding the Order-in-Original dated 18-2-99 rejecting the refund claim of the appellant of Rs. 2,43,207/-. 2. From the material on record, it transpires that the appellant had succeeded before the Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the order of the Assista .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as paid under protest and under protest letter was filed with the Superintendent of Central Excise instead of the Assistant Commissioner. It is also alleged that the Assistant Commissioner without issuing notice of granting personal hearing rejected the refund claim on 18-2-99. 6. Rule 233B of the said Rules provides for procedure to be followed in cases where duty is paid under protest. It is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n adequate opportunity of hearing to the appellant against the rejection of the refund claim which was made on the basis of the appellant s succeeding before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the appellant s claim to the cash discount at the rate of 4.953%. The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) did not take into consideration even this aspect. The impugned order, therefore, cannot .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X