9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1098X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was some classification dispute and as a result of which the appellants provisionally paid the tax under the scheme of provisional assessment. By order dated 30th June, 1992, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the product in question was not dutiable, as the onus of marketability was not discharged. Thereafter the Appellant - assessee applied for refund for an amount of Rs. 17,25,392/-(Excess paid). The period for which the duty had been paid was 23/01/1990 to 7th March, 1991. The said refund claim was initially rejected vide Order-in-Original dated 30th January, 2002 on the ground of unjust enrichment and further ordered that the amount be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund (however, no transfer of funds took place). 3. The Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner (Appeals) upholding the admissibility of refund to the party. The CESTAT vide is Final Order No.681/08-EX dated 18/06/2008 upheld the order of Commissioner (Appeals) and rejected the appeal of the Revenue. In view of the aforesaid Final Order of the CESTAT dated 18/06/2008, the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division V, Noida vide his Memorandum No.726/R/AC/N-V/08 dated 29/10/2008 allowed the refund of interest, amounting to Rs. 29,44,719/- on the duty amount of Rs. 17,25,392/- but appropriated this also against the outstanding demand of arrears pending against them. Hence the present appeal against the impugned order. 5. Being aggrieved the Appellant - assessee is before this Tribunal on the ground that the adjustment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of unjust enrichment. 7. Heard the parties and perused the records. 8. I find that the grant of refund has been finalized by this Tribunal along with interest. Further, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 479 of 1996 the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the Petition of the assessee has been pleased to direct that the assessee is entitled to refund with 12% interest, being order dated 6th July, 2000. Against the said order Revenue had preferred Civil Appeal No. 1042 of 2001, which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by its order dated 29/04/2003. Under such facts and circumstances, I hold that the subsequent show cause notice issued by the Department being SCN No.V/15/ADJ/Noida/BTCL/77/09/13926 dated 14/09/2009 is ab initio void ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
