9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount is legal and correct for entertaining the appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) was of the view that the appellant was supposed to make pre-deposit payment in cash. This issue has been taken to the Hon ble Gujarat High Court. The Hon ble Gujarat High Court in CADILA HEALTH CARE PVT LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [ 2018 (11) TMI 80 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] held that the appellant s payment of pre-deposit through cenvat in appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) is acceptable. The appeal filed before Commissioner (Appeals) along with the pre-deposit, the demand amount of the said case could not have been adjusted against the sanctioned refund, therefore, the refund ought to have been paid on the date of sanction itself - Since the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urat-II Commissionerate vide his letter F. No. V-2(ST)VAD-APP-II/SRT/II/2014-15 dated 28.11.2014 is to be taken as regular order, and therefore, non filing of the appeal against the same would go against the appellant. The appellant being aggrieved by the said order dated 28.11.2014 approached the Hon ble High Court Gujarat under Civil Application No. 1981 of 2018, the Hon ble High Court vide order dated 26.06.2018 with regard to issue of pre-deposit quashed the communication of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 21.08.2014 and 28.11.2014 and held that the pre-deposit made by the appellant by availing cenvat credit shall be accepted for the purpose of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act and directed the learned Commissioner (Appeals) to hear th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Representative) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that since the appellant had not made the pre-deposit and there was no stay, there was a clear demand which was recoverable therefore, the appropriation of refund against the said demand was legal and correct. Hence, there is no question of interest payment on the refund amount. 5. I have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. 6. I find that there is chequered history of the entire case however, the case can be decided brief. I find that the refund of the appellant was appropriated against the confirmed demand. The said confirmed demand order was under challenge in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The dispute was that whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
