2012 (5) TMI 113

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the following question of law:- Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that limitation was not applicable in respect of refund of deposit made by the respondents? 2. The relevant facts are that by a show cause notice duty was demanded pertaining to inadmissible MODVAT credit. While opposing the claim, the assessee voluntarily deposited amount of Rs.1,80,000/-. Thereafter, on adjudication .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d the period of limitation. 4. Challenging the aforesaid order dated 28th March, 2003, the assessee filed an appeal and the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who vide order dated 30th June, 2003 set aside the order dated 28th March, 2003 and held that the assessee was entitled to the amount claimed in the refund application. Further appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... disposed of by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), the assessee had filed refund claim on 26th March, 2002. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed by the Commissioner of the Central Excise (Appeals) on 31st January, 2003. Thus, in the present case, refund claim was filed by the assessee even before the appeal filed by the Revenue was disposed of by the First Appellate Authority. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X