Filing ROM applications before CEGAT in respect of CEGAT Orders contrary to Apex Courts' Orders - Instruction - Reg.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o the DO letter F.No. 385/62/99/JC/2000 dated 17.2.2000 from Shri. P.N. Malhotra, Member (L J) and addressed to all Chief Commissioners of Customs and Central Excise. Through the said letter, Board had informed the Chief Commissioners about the out-come of our SLP and related CAs on the question whether the principles of unjust enrichment would be applicable in respect of cases of refund of duty p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y the Joint Secretary (Review). 3. Yet another landmark judgment of the Supreme Court has settled the question whether limitation as provided under section 11A of the CE Act would apply to recovery under rule 571 of credit wrongly availed prior to the amendment of rule 571 on 6-10-1988. The apex court decided this Excise Reference Case (C) No 3 of 1995 on 11-5-2000. This order is reported in 2000 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ve dealt with similar question on the Income Tax or the Sales tax side. A similar issue on our side is also under consideration of the larger Bench of the CEGAT. 1. B.V.K. SESHAVATRAM Vs. C.I.T. 1994 (210) ITR 633 (AP) 2. KILKOTAGIRI TEA COFFEE ESTATE Vs ITAT - 1988 (174) ITR 579 (KER). 3. PARSHURAM POTTERY WORKS Vs. D.R. TRIVEDI - 1975 (100) ITR 651 (GUJ). 4. M.K. VENKATACHALAM V .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X