2005 (4) TMI 338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal whereby the refund application was rejected on the ground that the appellant surrendered registration in November 2000, therefore, the refund is not admissible. 3. The contention of the appellants is that they were paying duty on fortnightly basis. The appellant on 13-10-2000 paid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... istration. In fact the same unit was working in Range-IV of the same Commissionerate and this unit has paid duty through PLA on realizing the mistake, therefore, they are entitled for the refund. The appellant also submitted that they are not asking for cash refund but they are asking only reversal of the credit to the extent that they had paid wrongly in October 2000 which was subsequently paid t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ad surrendered the registration and they are not working. In these circumstances, as the appellants are working in the same range, therefore, the impugned order saying that the registration is surrendered and appellants are not entitled for refund in cash is not sustainable and set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide afresh after affording an opportunity of hea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X