9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - We have heard Shri Suriyanarayanan, learned Advocate appearing for the Appellant and Shri Samir Chitkara, learned SDR for the Revenue. 2. As per the facts on record, appellant are engaged in manufacture of processed MMF fabrics. The appellant filed a declaration under Rule 962ZQ of Central Excise Rules, 1944 for fixa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner. Accordingly, they filed refund claim on 21-01-03. 3. In the ordinary course, the refund claimed by them would have been entertained by authorities below. However, there is parallel development in the case. It is seen that apart from taking the original order, fixing the ACP, in appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant also claimed refund of the said amount before Dy. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subsequently filed by the appellant on 21-01-03, in terms of Tribunal's order dated 28-09-01 rejecting the Revenue's appeal on the issue of ACP, can not be entertained second time. On the other hand, the appellant's contention is that the present refund claim has arisen as a consequence of the Tribunal's order fixing ACP without inclusion of length of galleries and as such should have been consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of the same should be considered. We find that in present case, the ACP was challenged by appellant and was held in favour of the appellant by Tribunal's decision. The consequence of the same would be that ACP is required to be re-fixed in terms of said decision and whatever demand or refund has arisen as a consequence, would be liable to be confirmed or refunded especially in terms of Mumbai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
