9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbsp; Shri Abhay P. Kolte, Advocate for Appellant Shri A.K. Prasad, Jt. CDR for Respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sst. Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 10th September 1997. Thereafter, M/s. SECL filed a refund claim under Section 11B as buyer of the goods who had not paid duty. This refund claim for the period from April, 1987 to Feb, 1994 was filed in November 1996. The Asst Commissioner of Central Excise rejected the refund claim. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) while holding that the refund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of CCE Mumbai II v. Allied Photographics India Ltd. - 2004 (166) ELT 3 (S.C.). He pointed out to paragraphs 13 and 15 of the Judgement wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the 'entire scheme of Section 11B showed the different between the rights of a manufacturer to claim refund and the right of a buyer to claim refund as separate and distinct and that the payment of duty unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bad - 2003 (154) ELT 350 (S.C.) and further submitted that the assessee is having a strong case on merits. 7. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides. 8. Coming to the question of limitation while M/s. ICL had paid the duty under protest, there is no dispute about the fact that there was no protest by the M/s. SECL. On the point as to whether in such a situati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
