2008 (9) TMI 785

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. [Order]. - This appeal is filed by the Revenue against order-in-appeal No. CEX.XI/JMJ/99/916/NSK/APPEAL/2003 dated 4-6-2003 vide which, the ld Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order of the adjudicating authority that rejected the refund claim. 2. None appeared on behalf of the respondents despite notice. There is a communication from the respondents that the matter may be decid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nce of credit notes will not render them eligible for refund. I have carefully examined the case in detail & find that it is a case of refund of C.E. duty paid in excess through oversight while clearing the goods from the factory under the invoice issued under Rule 52A of the Central Excise Rules 1944. The claim for duty paid in excess has been clearly time barred & the same has been clearly accep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... duced on 29-5-1998 instead of 21-12-98. I am hereby inclined to admit the plea of the appellants with consequential relief & dismiss the order in original of the Assistant Commissioner as redundant". It can be seen from the above reproduced portion of the order that ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has came to a conclusion that the claim for duty paid in excess has been filed the respondents beyond the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X