2012 (11) TMI 289

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n are directed against order-in-appeal No.SB(113)/113 /Th-I/2010 dated 09/08/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-I. 2. The facts arising for consideration in this are as follows:- 2.1 The appellant, M/s. Tej Control Systems Pvt. Ltd. Thane, are manufacturers of goods falling under chapter 85 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have two registrations, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to pay the amount once again. The appellant went in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide impugned order dismissed their appeal. Hence, the appellants are before me. 3. The Ld. Advocate for the appellant submits that there is no dispute about the fact that they made the payments even before the issuance of the adjudication order. The only mistake committed by them was that instead of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant committed a irreparable mistake or has the department not received the amount which they demanded. Inasmuch as the department has received the amount due from the appellant quoting of wrong registration number in the concerned challans is only a technical error which can be rectified at the department's end itself. Such demand by the department is perverse and unsustainable in law. According .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X