TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evani, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Gaurang H. Bhatt, for the Appellant. [Order per : H.N. Devani, J. (Oral)]. - Appellant-revenue has challenged order dated 26-11-2008 made by Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal) proposing the following questions : 1. Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CESTA Tribunal has erred in the eye of law in not holding that the practice adopted by the said assessee would in effect defeat the purpose of the Exemption Notification No. 8/97, dtd. 1-3-1997? 2. Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CESTA Tribunal is justified in the eye of law in holding that the said assessee would be entitled to the benefit of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er sub-heading No. 6201.00 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The respondent removed rejects and waste of ready made garments in the Domestic Tariff Area during the period 4-9-2000 to 14-3-2002 and subsequently filed a refund claim for Rs. 12,61,982/- on the ground that an amount of Rs. 18,51,934/- had been paid under protest towards duty calculated in terms of Notification No. 2/95 dated 4-1-1995, whereas it was required to pay duty of Rs. 5,90,042/- only in terms of Notification No. 8/97. Pursuant to the application, show cause notice came to be issued denying the claim made by the respondent, which culminated into an order dated 12-9-2003 of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, rejecting the claim of refund made by the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the aspect of unjust enrichment. 5. Thus, it is apparent that the Tribunal has only accepted the say of the departmental representative that the nature of the raw materials received by the respondent from 100% EOUs was required to be verified as to whether the same were of indigenous nature or not and has accordingly directed the concerned authority to inquire as to whether all the raw materials received by the respondent from other 100% EOUs were of indigenous origin or not and grant the claim of refund made by the respondent only upon such verification. In the circumstances, no infirmity can be found in the impugned order of the Tribunal in directing that the claim of the respondent be considered after verification the nature of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
