TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accordingly. - matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority. - E/166/2010 - A/1918/2011-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 25-10-2011 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri P.V. Sheth, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.K. Mall, AR, for the Respondent. [Order]. Three show cause notices were issued to the appellant demanding cenvat credit of Rs. 1,31,347/- on the ground that the same was wrongly utilized which culminated in confirmation of the demand and after two rounds of litigation finally ended up resulting in withdrawal of the whole proceedings. The proceedings were started in 1997 and ended with the adjudication order of the Assistant Commissioner finally on 20-12-2005. During the proceedings as per the dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned original order and the Order-in-Appeal have been passed based on the letter of the appellant dated 25-4-2009. In fact this letter refers to the correspondence and is in reply to the letter dated 13-4-2009 of the Assistant Commissioner. In the letter the appellants stated as follows : You will appreciate the fact that the refund claim does not arise out of the order of the Hon ble Commissioner (A) dated 3-10-2005 but has arisen out of the order of the Hon ble CESTAT and the refund claim is duly filed by us on 26-2-2004 and the query raised were complied vide letter dated 11-8-2004. Therefore to say now that no refund claim is filed in pursuance of the order of the Commissioner (A) is unjustified. 4. The department has take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... struction, the appellant is required to file only a letter along with proof of payment for claiming refund consequent to appellate orders and therefore the proper course for the department was to point out the omission rather than stating that no refund application has been filed. However, I find that the appellants also probably made a mistake when they wrote a letter on 25-4-2009 that the refund claim does not arise out of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 3-10-2005 but the claim filed on 26-2-2004 should have been considered. 6. The above discussion would show that even though appellants wrote on 23-3-2009 that they were eligible for refund of the amount paid as per Commissioner (Appeals) order dated 3-10-2005 reply by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
