Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

OVERSEAS ENGINEERS Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RAJKOT

2007 (4) TMI 474 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD

Recovery of erroneous granted refund - Held that: - the order of refund dt. 26-4-04 has not been appealed against or reviewed by the Department and therefore recovery of the refund of ₹ 1,11,744/- paid from the appellant by issue of show cause .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) No. 139/2006/96(RAJ)/COMMR. (A)/RP/RAJ, dt. 8-3-2006, by which order of original authority No. R/53/2005, dt. 3-5-2005 was upheld. 2. Heard both .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

exempted and they were wanting to clear diesel oil engine without payment of duty for use in the manufacture of centrifugal pump which was meant for export. This was being objected to by the Department. Therefore, they gave a letter of protest dt. 12 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

arted another unit which came under Range 6 of the same division and have taken out separate central excise registration. The second unit also cleared diesel engines on payment of duty on diesel engine during the months of Nov. 01 and Dec. 01 for use .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o. 2 also and sanctioned the refund. (c) Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued and the Astt. Commr. ordered recovery of the refund already sanctioned. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dt. 8-3-06 upheld the order of original authority. 4 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of show cause notice under Section 11A is not in order. He is relying upon the decision in case of M/s. Voltas Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad reported in 2006 (202) E.L.T. 355 (Tri-Bang.). The relevant portion (Para 6) of the same is reproduced below: 6.&ems .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e order of the Assistant Collector dated 17-8-1989 is erroneous. The Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, held that the cost of the said packing is includible. By all this, the Revenue is trying to recover the refund granted to the appellan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d. In other words, as per Board s instructions, the order dt. 20-4-1990 should have been reviewed by the Revenue. In fact, the Review should have followed the Show Cause Notice issued under Section 11A for recovery of erroneous refund. This is very c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version