9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 854X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ties confirmed demands and imposed penalties against all the four assessees. The assessees made deposits under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act). The disputes were remanded for re-adjudication by the Tribunal. The findings of evasion in respect of all the assessees were vacated by the Commissioner (Appeals) in orders passed later. Assessees had claimed refund of deposits made during the investigation as well as the predeposit under Section 35F of the Act. The original authority allowed refund of the amounts claimed by the four assessees. Vide the impugned orders, the Commissioner (Appeals) sanctioned interest on the amounts deposited during the investigation and under Section 35F for the period beyond three months of fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2-6-2000 Not determined E/CO/05/06 Sowbagya To set aside the aforesaid department appeal Not determined E/825/05 Commissioner of Central Excise v. Jayadevi To set aside Commissioner (Appeals) order of granting interest from 2-6-2000 Not determined E/CO/06/06 Jayadevi To set aside the aforesaid department appeal Not determined E/826/05 Commissioner of Central Excise v. Mahashree To set aside Commissioner (Appeals) order of granting interest from 2-6-2000 Not determined E/CO/07/06 Mahashree To set aside the aforesaid department appeal Not determined E/827/05 Commissioner of Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (83) E.L.T. 29 (All) In this judgment the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad held that the appellants were entitled to refund of pre-deposit when the Tribunal had remanded the order confirming demand against the appellants therein. 4. Countering the appeal filed by the assessees, the ld. JCDR submits that vide its decision in Coronation Spinning India v. CCE, Calcutta [2004 (170) E.L.T. 143 (Tri.-LB)] the Tribunal had negatived the prayer for grant of interest on refund of pre-deposit from the date of the remand order of the Supreme Court and held that the relevant date was the date of final order passed by the Tribunal in terms of the remand order of the Apex Court. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
