9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds the classification of the product of the appellant and vide show cause notice dated 7/12/2000 additional duty was demanded. The appellant had paid the duty demand under protest totalling Rs. 1,05,74,234/- Subsequently vide order dated 31.10.2001 the Show Cause Notice was finalised and dropped. The appellant filed refund claim on 11/12/2001 for the duty paid under protest Rs. 1,05,74,234/- for the period 10/10/2000 to 31/10/2000. The refund claim was rejected as time-barred and on the ground of unjust enrichment vide the Order-in-Original dated 28/02/2002. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred appeal before Id. Commissioner appeals who vide the appellate order dated 01/7/2003 allowed the appeal with all consequential relief. Pursu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith consequential relief. In response thereto the Assistant Commissioner communicated vide his letter dated 18/1/2005 stating therein that the refund claim in their case had arisen on the basis of appellate order dated 17/3/04 and in pursuance thereto the appellant had given refund claim application on 19/4/04 and thereafter the refund was granted within 3 (three) months of the date of filing of such letter. Hence question for interest does not arise. Further mentioning that such observations have already, been made in the refund order dated 11/6/04. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred appeal before Id. Commissioner (Appeals) who have vide the present impugned order rejected the appeal on the ground that there is no appealable order wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the impugned order is hit by the 'doctrine of merger'. The Id. Commissioner (Appeals) who is the subordinate authority than the Tribunal cannot enter into the question which has been decided by the Tribunal and have attained finality. Thus I hold that the impugned order is hit by the 'doctrine of merger' and accordingly I set aside the same. Thus the appeal is allowed in favour of the appellant. The Id- Counsel also relies on the ruling of the joint secretary, Govt. of India, Department of Revenue wherein on the question of interest, it was held, relevant date whether from 3 (three) months period of filing of claim or 3 (three) months from the date of presenting of the revision order of Government to the Assistant Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
