2015 (11) TMI 1095

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lf, who adjusted the sanctioned refund claim against the penalty amount, due to be paid by the assessee, it has to be treated as pre-deposit, which are subject to outcome of final order of the appellate authority. Revenue cannot take the benefit of its own actions i.e. first adjusting the outstanding dues against the sanctioned claims and then to say that same were not pre-deposits. - As regards t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RDER Very short issue is involved in the present appeal. Proceeding initiated against the appellant for denial of Cenvat credit resulted in confirmation of same along with imposition of penalty of ₹ 5 lakh. On appeal against the said order, penalty was reduced by Commissioner (Appeals) to ₹ 4 lakh. In the meanwhile certain rebates were sanctioned to the appellant and the penalty of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s such, he rejected the refund claim on the point of time bar. 3. I do not find any merits in the above reasoning of the Commissioner (Appeals). When it is the department itself, who adjusted the sanctioned refund claim against the penalty amount, due to be paid by the assessee, it has to be treated as pre-deposit, which are subject to outcome of final order of the appellate authority. Revenue .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X