9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ingots cut end pieces to their sister unit for converting them into ingots by melting without payment of duty under Rule 57F(3) of the erstwhile Rules, 1944 during the period from August 1995 to October 1995. 2. Show-cause notice was issued proposing demand of duty of Rs.2,61,818/-, which was confirmed by the adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 25/1996 dated 27.3.1996. The appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and also reversed the said amount from their RG23A Part II account under protest. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the appellant vide Order-in-Appeal No. 128/98 dated 28.9.1998. Revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 28.9.1998. The Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 01. It is submitted that the amount of Rs.2,61,818/- was paid from the CENVAT account. Thereafter, the appellant paid duty from PLA for the subsequent clearances and therefore the adjudicating authority rightly sanctioned the refund claim in cash. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. - 2006 (201) ELT 559 (Kar.) which was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in 2008 (223) ELT A170 (SC). He also relied on the following decisions of the Tribunal:- (a) CCE Vs. Kochar Sung - Up Acrylic Ltd. - 2010 (259) ELT 713 (b) CCE Vs. S.K. Sacks Pvt. Ltd. - 2010 (261) ELT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remained unutilized in the said CENVAT account, such credit cannot be allowed by way of cash. The Tribunal in the case of Kochar Sung-Up Acrylic Ltd. (supra), after considering the Larger Bench decision has observed that when the duty was paid through CENVAT account and the unit was functioning and by the time the matter was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee which resulted in refund and the refund was sanctioned and the unit had closed down. The registration certificate had been surrendered, the assessee is eligible for cash refund. The same view was taken by the Tribunal in the Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 6. In my considered view, the adjudicating authority should have examined as to whether after payment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
