2005 (2) TMI 618

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thy, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - This appeal arises from OIA No. 174/2001, dated 17-9-2001 rejecting the refund claim of Rs. 20,19,627.95 and confirming the Assistant Commissioner's order to credit the amount to the Consumer Welfare Fund as per the provisions of Section 12C of the Central Excise Act. The appellants had claimed refund in respect of pre-depos....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ions of Section 11B or provisions of Section 11D are not attracted. (a) Suvidhe Ltd. v. UOI - 1996 (82) E.L.T. 77 (Bom.) (Affirmation by the Supreme Court reported in 1997 (94) E.L.T. A159 (b) Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur - 1999 (114) E.L.T. 371 (S.C.) (c) Konark Cement & Asbestos Ltd. v. CCE, Bhubaneswar - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 634 (Tribunal) (d) Steelco Gujarat Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara - 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6) E.L.T. 647 (Tri.)]. 4. It was also submitted that the department did not file any appeal against the order of finalisation of assessments and, therefore the refund was required to be made to them by implementing the orders of finalisation and in this regard, he relied on the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of CCE, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.). ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CE, Mumbai-II v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. - 2001 (132) E.L.T. 632 (Tri.-Del.) (c) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur - 2002 (144) E.L.T. 672 (Tri. -Del.) (d) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. & Anr. v. CC, Nagpur - [2003 (158) E.L.T. 833 (Tri.) = 2004 (60) RLT 574 (CESTAT-Mum.)] 6. The learned SDR reiterated the Commissioner's view. 7. On a careful consideration and per....