TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 789X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 182/98, dated 4-12-1998 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Hyderabad. The contention before the Commissioner (Appeals) was that the appellants assessment were provisional and after finalisation, the Superintendent had permitted them to re-credit an amount of Rs. 3,34,155.73. However, a show cause notice was issued later on 29-9-92 seeking to recove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner (Appeals), however, agreeing on this point, proceeded on the basis of Section 11D(1) which laid down as follows :- Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any order or direction of the Appellate Tribunal or any Court in any other provision of this Act of the rules made thereunder, every person who has collected any amount from the buyer of any goods in any manner as rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be recovered and suo motu the appellants are required to deposit notwithstanding the fact they will be entitled for refund or not after finalisation of the amount. He submits that the Commissioner has rightly invoked Section 11D(1) of CE Act which gives power to the authorities to direct the persons to deposit the amount of duty collected by them representing duty of excise from the buyers. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nrichment. This point has already been dealt with by the Tribunal and the Apex Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries and the Tribunal has decided it in Needle Industries (India) Ltd. and Indo Flogates Ltd. (both supra). Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) does not dispute this point that the appellants are entitled for re-crediting the amount. He has proceeded on the basis that the appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
