2007 (3) TMI 193

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ied in rejecting refund - Appeal Nos. E/241 & 242/2005 - 366 & 367/2007 - Dated:- 16-3-2007 - Dr. S.L. Peeran, Member (J) and Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - These appeals arise from Orders- in-Appeal Nos. 232/2004-C.E., dated 31-12-2004 and 203/2004-C.E., dated 16-12-2004 by which the refund was granted. However, on unjust enrichment, the Commissi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... peals) although noted in the order. This is the grievance of the appellants against the impugned order. 2. We have heard both sides in the matter and perused the judgments. We find that this Bench, iii the case of Transformers Electricals Kerala Ltd. v. CC, Cochin - 2005 (188) E.L.T. 60 (Tri.-Bang.) has clearly held in the light of earlier judgments that once the Chartered Accountant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssue stands covered and more particularly when he has noted the particulars in the order. The Commissioner (Appeals) is not deliberately followed the judgment despite having noted the same in his order. The appellants are entitled for refund in terms of the evidence produced and hence, the appeals are allowed with consequential relief. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMIT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X