9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and for grant of consequential relief by way of reduction in interest and penalty on account of excessive demand. The mistakes supposed to have been committed by the CESTAT are given in para 4 of the ROM application. The same is reproduced herein below "4. It appears that the Hon'ble CESTAT while passing the above order has committed the following mistakes. (1) Wrongly observed that, Rs. 1,28,623/- has been demanded by the Original Authority, whereas it has been appropriated by the Original Authority. (2) Wrongly gave the benefit to the extent of Rs. 56,548/- to the Respondents, whereas they have rightly paid the said duty on their violation and correctly appropriated by the Adjudicating Authority after elaborate discussions in his OIO. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and appropriation are two different things. Before appropriation of any amount, that amount should be confirmed. Here, Rs. 1,28,623/- has been appropriated. That appropriation requires a confirmed demand. That confirmed demand is also for an amount of Rs. 1,28,623/-. In our view, CESTAT has not made any wrong observation at all. 6. The above amount of Rs. 1,28,623/- consists of two components which are an amount of Rs. 72,075/- and an amount of Rs. 56,548/-. As regards Rs. 72,075/-. the Party has debited it prior to the Show Cause Notice and there is no dispute or quarrel about its appropriation by the Revenue. As regards the second component of the total amount appropriated, the same is Rs. 56,548/-. Let me give the date of payment of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s no mistake at all. There is no wrong benefit given to the Party to the extent of Rs. 56,548/-. It is true that they have rightly paid the duty liable for period subsequent to the period of dispute and the Adjudicating Authority has no need to appropriate sums towards any other dues. To put it differently, the Adjudicating Authority should confine himself to the period of dispute and should not overstep the same. 8. As regards the amount of Rs. 75,025/-, it is on record that amount has been paid by PLA Sl. Nos. 196, 197 and 198 dated 31-10-1996. Since there is evidence for payment of this amount by the Party, there cannot be a further demand. If there is a demand for a sum already paid, it amounts to demand of duty twice. Revenue can peru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
