9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (11) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hu, JDR, for Respondent. [Order per : R. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - This day, only stay application was listed for hearing and not the appeal. 2. Shri Koruthu, the learned consultant, on behalf of the applicants/appellants stated that this is not a Special Bench matter. The appeal involves an issue which can be decided within a short campus. In any case, they are not challenging or disputing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut rejected the claim for the earlier period from 18-6-1977 to 2-8-1977 as time barred. In pursuance of this Collector (Appeals)' order, the Asstt. Collector issued a cheque for an amount of Rs. 84,412.17 sanctioning the refund. Subsequently, the same Asstt. Collector issued a notice to the appellants to show cause as to why the amount of refund should not be demanded back. After considering the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal has been filed against the order of the Collector (Appeals) by the department before the Tribunal. The order of the Collector (Appeals) thus stands unchallenged and has become final. The Asstt. Collector only implemented the said order and by way of implementation, initially he issued a cheque and subsequently by withdrawing the cheque, credited the amount in the PLA. Since the order of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge the classification, or the applicability of the notification. The admitted facts clearly indicate that the refund has been sanctioned by the Asstt. Collector only in pursuance of the order of the Collector (Appeals) dated 27-12-1985. It is also not disputed that no appeal has been filed against the said order of the Collector (Appeals) and it has become final. The Asstt. Collector was only impl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
