2008 (9) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant. Shri B.S. Suhag, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President].- Heard both sides. The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby demand of Rs. 12,46,522/- was confirmed and penalty was imposed. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of cement and clinker and having two units, one is at Narsingarh and another is at Imlai. In Feb.'01, the Narsinga .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that they undertake not to file any refund in respect of excess duty paid in Imlai unit. 3. The contention of the revenue is that where the duty in excess has been paid, the applicant has to file refund and where the duty has been paid short, the appellant was liable to pay differential duty as per the impugned order. 4. We find that in this case excess duty has been paid in one unit which is eq .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X