TMI Blog1998 (7) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustice U.L. Bhat, President]. This appeal is directed against the order-in-original dated 7-5-1991 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad, confirming demand of Rs. 10,665/40 under the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The amount was said to have been erroneously refunded to the appellant pursuant to the appellant s refund application. From le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s amount was arrived at. The reply also stated that the appellant had not suppressed any facts and had produced all relevant documents before the Assistant Collector at the time of hearing, obviously of the refund application. Appellant sought particulars so as to enable a proper reply to be sent. Notice of personal hearing was given to the appellant to which the appellant sent a reply again askin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e jurisdictional Adjudicating Authority, who shall immediately furnish to the appellant the basis on which the tentative view regarding erroneous refund was taken, the worksheet therefor as also the occasion when the invoices were called for from the appellant and not furnished by the appellant to enable the appellant to submit a proper reply. There shall be granted an opportunity of personal hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
