9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eferred challenging the order of attachment dated 9/3/2009 for failure on part of the petitioner to make payment of Rs.24,29,387/- through the P.L. Account of the petitioner. Upon issuance of notice, respondent authorities have put in appearance and affidavit-in-reply dated 31/3/2009 has been tendered. Considering the scope of controversy between the parties, the petition is taken up for final hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cess of Rs.33,734/- in cash / from P.L. Account. However, correspondence ensued between the parties and ultimately resulted in the impugned order of attachment dated 9/3/2009. In the affidavit-in-reply, in paragraph no.5 respondent authority has referred to communication dated 6/1/2009 addressed by the petitioner to the respondent authority. Said communication reads as under :- Date January 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Central Excise, Anand. Hence we have approached to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Anand on 05.01.2009 for the above subject matter and in the discussion the Assistant Commissioner the matter is related to 2006 and refund/re-credit period is one year due to it is time barred so they can not allow to re-credit in the CENVAT account and the same is not within their power. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2009 with Respondent no.2, with a copy to be placed on record of this petition and make such payment on/or before 16/4/2009. Upon filing of such undertaking, respondent authority is directed to lift the attachment effected vide order dated 9/3/2009 within a period of three working days thereafter. The petitioner shall be allowed to take re-credit by crediting CENVAT account only after actual paym ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
