9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 99/2005 MCH dated 14/02/2005. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the refund of an amount of Rs. 46,91,792/- against 24 bond bills of entry in complex in order of Apex Court on 12-03-1997 in civil appeals no. 691-694/89. The adjudicating authority had sanctioned the refund by a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oof of not passing on the incidence the duty liability. Ld. Counsel could draw our attention to findings of the first appellate authority. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by both sides, we find that the issue is regarding the refund of an amount arising out of favourable decision from the Apex Court in respect of very same assessee. We find that the first appellate a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date of payment by the respondent till date of refund by the department. The said amount has been refunded to the respondent with interest as per common final order of the S.C. dated 12-3-1997. For the Bill of Entries covered by C.A. No. 691-964/89, the refund amount has already been sanctioned to the respondents. In the appeal filed by the department, the same has been challenged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The said documents are not a matter of appreciation in the present appeal. The claim pertains to consequential refund arising out of favourable decision from S.C. regarding classification of the goods in favour of the respondents. The refund granted in other Bill of Entries pertaining to different appeal before the Supreme Court, disposed by common order is also not a matter of chall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
