2017 (11) TMI 144

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hich has not attained finality is not legal and proper - the appropriation of the refund against the disputed pending appeal is not sustainable in law as the demand in those cases have not reached finality. Therefore impugned order set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/875/2004-DB - Final Order No. 21990/2017 - Dated:- 31-8-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member and Shr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y the Commissioner(Appeals), Central Excise, Mangalore relying on the decision of the Ahmedabad High Court and confirmed by the Honble Supreme Court. The Assistant Commissioner vide order dt. 09/02/2004 appropriated this amount under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the demand of ₹ 62,61,637/- confirmed by Order-in-Original No.58/2002. The appellant filed appeal before .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... circular issued by the CBEC. He relied upon the following decisions:- i. ABB Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore [2016(338) ELT 766 (Tri. Bang.)] ii. Voltas Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad-II [2006(201) ELT 615 (Tri. Bang.)] iii. CCE, Bangalore-III Vs. Stella Rubber Works (Unit-II) [2012(275) ELT 404 (Kar.)] iv. Poonam Trading Company Vs. CC(Import), Mumbai [2008(229) ELT 627 (Tri. Mumbai)] v. Hindust .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X