9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 890X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner for re-computation of the demand? - Held that: - demand was not finally decided by this tribunal - The demand was very much existing at the time of passing Tribunal order for the reason that re-quantification was directed to the original adjudicating authority. Therefore in the present case it cannot be said that there is delay on the part of the department in sanctioning of the refu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri. Vipin Jain, Ld. Counsel submits that pre-deposit of ₹ 1 Crore was made during the pendency of the appeal. In one of the order, demand case was decided by the Tribunal vide Final Order No.C-II/848 to 852/WZB/04 dated 5-3-2004 wherein Tribunal has though set aside the impugned order but remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for re-quantific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .T. 632 (Tri. - Ahmd)] (b) King Win Johnson (India) Versus Commissioner Of Central Excise, Jaipur 2006 (193) E.L.T. 76 (Tri. - Del.) (c) Voltas Limited Vs. Union of India[1999(112) ELT 34 (Del)] (d) CCE Vs. ITC Ltd [2005(179) ELT 15(SC)] (e) Sheela Foam Pvt Ltd Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex. Noida[2003(154) ELT 522(Tri.-LB)] 3. On the other hand, Shri. Ajay Kumar, Ld. Joint Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is disposed of by the Tribunal, if any pre-deposit made in relation to such appeal, it should be refunded within a period of three months from the date of the Tribunal order. I agree with the Ld. Counsel only to the extent when the appeal is finally allowed by the Tribunal, in such case amount is refundable within a period of three months. In the fact of the present case demand was not finally dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
