9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 950X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stock, as well as those lying in the finished goods, was paid in the month of July, 2004 and the interest was paid on 5-12-2005 through PLA. It is also observed from the case records that the adjudicating authority vide OIO, dated. 24-4-2007 has sanctioned refund of interest amount of 3,79,312/- as the same was paid on 5-12-2005 and the refund application was made on 17-11-2005. So far as the rem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the appellant was rejected by the first appellate authority. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant M/s. Mahindra Gujarat Tractor Ltd. Vadodara were manufacturing tractors which got exempted as per Notification No. 23/2004-C.E., dated 9-7-2004. Appellant stopped availing benefit of CENVAT Credit on the inputs received w.e.f. 9-7-2004 for the manufacture of exempted tractors. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-2007 which was upheld by the first appellate authority under the impugned OIA, dated 28-9-2007 issued on 16-10-2007 against which the present appeal has been filed by the appellant. 3. When this case was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri S.K. Shukla (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that the appellant has filed the refund claim beyond the presc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s paid on 5-12-2005 through PLA. It is also observed from the case records that the adjudicating authority vide OIO, dated. 24-4-2007 has sanctioned refund of interest amount of ₹ 3,79,312/- as the same was paid on 5-12-2005 and the refund application was made on 17-11-2005. So far as the remaining refund claim amount of ₹ 38,22,813/- is concerned, the same represent the duty self-calc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ltd. (supra) was available when the amounts were paid by the appellant and appellant cannot claim a mistake on his part. Therefore, the case of the Gujarat High Court on facts was different than the facts of the present appeal. As such, the first appellate authority has correctly rejected the appeal filed by the appellant on merit. 6. Based on the above observations, appeal filed by the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
