9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 503X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal debit in the cenvat account was under protest and the second payment was made since, the department objected to debiting of interest in the cenvat account - Second payment has to be taken as part of the payment made originally and it cannot be said that there was no protest as regards the second payment when it was rectification of an error committed in debiting the interest amount in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ( sic ) the interest amount separately amounting to Rs. 31,934/- on 11.7.06. Thereafter the matter went into litigation and the liability of service tax attained finality with the order of the Tribunal dated 29.5.09. Thereafter the appellant filed a refund claim for the excess amount paid by them and the original adjudicating authority vide order dated 28.10.10 allowed the refund of Rs. 59,299/- b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le besides pointing out the time limit has to be accounted from the date of order of the Tribunal and not from the date of Order-in-Original. However the appellate authority did not consider the fact that payment was made under protest and did not make any observation with regard to the claim but proceeded to allow the appeal of the Revenue on the ground that the refund claim had been submitted be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt is debited under protest. Apparently the Superintendent took objection for the debit of interest in the cenvat credit and thereafter the appellants made the cash payment. Under these circumstances it has to be held that the payments made by the appellant were under protest only and therefore the time limit under Section 11B would not be applicable. At this stage, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
