9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... restrictions were imposed by the amendment under Notification No.65/2003-CE dated 06.08.2003 which appears to have been taken into account in restricting the refund claim by Revenue for the period January –March, 2003. We find no jusitification for such restriction. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/366/2008 - FO/75878/2018 - Dated:- 4-5-2018 - DR. SATISH CHANDRA, PRESIDENT AND SHRI V.PADMANABHAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri K.Choudhary, Suptd.(AR) for the Appellant (s) Shri N.K.Choudhary, Advocate for the Respondent (s) ORDER Per Shri V. Padmanabhan 1. The present appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 09/SH/CE(A)/GHY/2008 dated 20.02.2008 . The respondent has a factory situated in Meghalaya a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lment of utilization of cenvat credit for payment of duty on the final product. The department worked out the refund eligibility for the period January March, 2003 subsequent to the sanction of such refunds and restricted such refund further. The relevant refund order was challenged by the respondent before the Commissioner (Appeals) which was decided by the impugned order in which the issue was decided in favour of the respondent. Aggrieved by the same the present appeal has been filed by Revenue. 2. With this background we heard both sides and perused the appeal record. 3. Ld. DR justified the order of the refund sanction authority and contended that the impugned order may be modified. 4. On the other hand the ld. Advocate for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he course of personal hearing. I have also perused the copies of orders dated 13.2.03 and 13.3.03 by which the refunds for the months of January 03 and February 03 respectively in terms of notification no.32/99-CE dated 8.78.99 as amended was given to the appellant. In these orders the Deputy Commissioner held that during the months the amount paid through cenvat crdit account was higher thatn the amount of Cenvat Credit availed on inputs used in manufacture or finished products cleared under the said notification and he therefore held that the entire amount paid through PLA was refundable. Again, while disposing the refund for March 03 the Deputy Commissioner held that the total duty paid during Jan 03 to Mar 03 was ₹ 1,66,05,791 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
