9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and was confirmed along with the interest and penalty was pending before the Committee on Disputes (COD). From this it is evident that at the time when the impugned demand with interest and penalty was adjusted from the refund, there was not only no stay against the recovery of the said dues nor was any stay application pending with regard thereto. Indeed the appeal against the order in terms of which the said dues were recoverable had been dismissed by CESTAT. In these circumstances, the lower authority is completely justified in holding that such adjustment was totally legal and proper in terms of Section 11 of Central Excise Act, 1944. - Decided against the appellant - E/3687/2006-Ex[DB] - Final Order No. 52480 /2016 - Dated:- 19-7-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d-balance amount of ₹ 386393/- was ordered to be credited in their PLA Account vide the above cited Order-in-Original passed by the Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise, Jablapur Division. The appellant has contended that the adjustment of the amount of ₹ 2,91,417/- against the arrears of ₹ 1,78,118/- plus interest thereon and penalty of ₹ 1000/- out of the refund amount of ₹ 6,77,868/- was totally illegal inasmuch as the appellant had filed appeal against order in terms of which the demand (resulting in the arears which were so deducted from the refund amount) was confirmed and had also applied to the Committee on Disputes for permission to file appeal there against and therefore as per the Board s Instructi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... person resides or conducts his business and the said Collector, on receipt of such certificate, shall proceed to recover from the said person the amount specified therein as if it were an arrear of land revenue .(Emphasis added) It is clear from the aforesaid Section 11 that any sum payable to the Central Government by an assessee can be deducted from any money owed to him by the Government unless there has been stay against recovery of such sum payable to the Government. We find that the appellant had filed appeal against the impugned demand and CESTAT vide a Final Order No. A/642/05 MBS and S-578/05 MBS dated 29.04.2005 dismissed the appeal as the appellant had not filed the requisite permission from the Committee of Disputes of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
