9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rupees One Crore Three Lakhs Ten Thousand Nine Hundred and Eight only) for the period 26/11/2012 to 31/03/2014, which claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 05/2015-CE dated 28/09/2015, against which an appeal was filed before the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority vide Order-in-Appeal dated 18/09/2017 directed the adjudicating authority to process the refund after holding that the appellant was entitled to the refund as claimed with a direction to verify the claim of the appellant with regard to the limitation. A consequential Order-in-Original was passed on 04/04/2018 whereby a refund of Rs. 23,15,352/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Fifteen Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Two only) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n-Appeal dated 18/09/2019 (supra) had however sanctioned a refund of Rs. 21,84,217/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Eighty Four Thousand Two Hundred and Seventeen only) for the quarter ending 30/06/2013 and Rs. 21,08,262/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Sixty Two only) for the quarter ending 30/09/2013 and interest of Rs. 16,70,205/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Seventy Thousand Two Hundred and Five only). Still not satisfied, the appellant approached the First Appellate Authority once again, who, vide impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 16/04/2021 directed the adjudicating authority to calculate the interest from the date of receipt of refund application and that the refund and interest for the quarter ending 30/06/2013 should be re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant was within the period of limitation and thus the appeal of the appellant came to be allowed with consequential relief of interest on delayed refund as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2011 (273) E.L.T. 3 (S.C). In view of the above clear directions, I am of the view that the authorities have erred in rejecting the refund especially when the order of this Bench has become final. This is a clear case of judicial indiscipline and contrary to the prevalent judicial hierarchical system, which cannot be sustained. In view of the above, the impugned order to this extent is set aside, the adjudicating authority is directed to grant full refund in terms of the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
