2005 (8) TMI 665

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II v. Allied Photographics India Ltd., reported in 2004 (166) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) = 2004 (4) SCC 34, and Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs reported in 2005 (181) E.L.T. 328 (S.C.) = 2005 (3) SCC 738. The High Court's decision to the contrary is wrong and is, therefore, set aside. The High Court had interfered in the matter .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thout prejudice to the respondent's submission before the authority concerned that such a compliance was not necessary having regard to the application already made for refund by it on 28-9-1999. It is made clear that this Court has decided the appeal purely on a question of law. All the issues of fact as well as the issue relating to the form of answer to the show cause notice will be decided by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X