9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned and is accordingly set aside. Since the issue is no more res integra and this Tribunal in the above cited case has held that the impugned order is not sustainable in law; therefore, by following the ratio of said decision in the above cited case, it is held that the impugned order is not sustainable and the same is set aside by allowing the appeal of the appellant - appeal allowed. - HON BLE Sh. S. S. GARG , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON BLE Sh. P. ANJANI KUMAR , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Rajeev Gupta ( Pr. Commr. ) , AR Shri Aneesh Dewan ( Supdt. ) , AR Shri Harish Kapoor ( Supdt. ) , AR ORDER PER : S. S. GARG The present appeal is directed against the Order- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Excise Act, 1944. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order, dropped the penalty but confirmed the demand along with interest. Hence, the present appeal. 3. None appeared on behalf of the appellant and the appellant vide their e-mail dated 11.10.2023 requested the Tribunal to decide the case on its merit in view of the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court. 4. On the other hand, the learned DR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard the learned DR for the Revenue and perused the grounds of the appeal filed by the appellant. 6. As per the grounds of the appeal, the appellant have stated that they had followed the provisions of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ein the Division Bench of this Tribunal has held in para 5 and 6 as under:- 5. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. We find that the impugned order considers the self-credit taken by the appellants as erroneous credit and confirms the demand of the same in terms of Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and penalty under Section 11AC ibid. We find that Hon ble High Court Jammu Kashmir vide their order in CEA 06/2018 held that: The refund of excise duty claimed by an assessee and sanctioned by the competent Authority vide its order under Notification No. 56 of 2002-CE which order has attained finality as not having been challenged before any appellate or revisional authority under the Exci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
