9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t For the Respondent : Shri Tarun Kumar, AR ORDER Per : Mr. Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim has been rejected by the authorities below. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed declaration under Rule 6 of Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty Rules, 2010 for Chewing tobacco and Un-manufactured Tobocco and paying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im for the amount paid during the course of investigation under protest of Rs. 15,61,27,927/-. Thereafter, a show cause notice dated 18.07.2017 was issued to the appellant for rejection of the refund claim and both the authorities below rejected their refund claim. Against that order, the appellant is before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that on the basis of the CRCL Report hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anctioned. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. AR submitted that as the order of holding that the appellant are manufacturing Jarda Scented Tobacco and the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed their appeal. Therefore, the refund claim cannot be sanctioned at this stage till the finalization of the issue of classification in terms of the show cause notice dated 01.07.2016. He also prayed that at thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant filed refund claim of the said amount paid during the course of investigation on 29.03.2017. Despite that, the adjudicating authority had not taken any pain to adjudicate the show cause notice dated 01.07.2016. Moreover, in the case of Digipro Import & Export Pvt. Limited vs. Union of India 2017 (350) ELT 145 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has examined the issue and observed as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s no scope at all to collect duty and that too without even quantifying the extent of duty evasion." Admittedly in this case, the amount has been deposited by the appellant during the course of investigation under protest and there is no dues pending against the appellant as on date, in that circumstances, the appellant is entitled for refund of Rs. 15,61,27,927/-. In these circumstances, we dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
