2018 (12) TMI 1097

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or Appellant: Shri K. Kinariwala (AR) For Respondent: Shri Rahul Patil (Dy. G.M.) ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair The Revenue filed ROM application for rectification in the order of this Tribunal in Appeal No. E/10489/2018 dated 15.01.2018 on the ground that this Tribunal dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable as the issue involved is of rebate of sugar cess. 2. Sh. K. Kinariwala, Ld. AR appeari .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e on sugar, therefore, being a duty of excise in the matter of rebate of said duty the appeal is not maintainable before this Tribunal. 4. After consideration of the submission made by both the sides, we find that Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the appellants own case held that sugar cess is a duty of excise. Moreover, the rebate claim was filed by the assesse under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X