TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Revenue filed this Appeal against the impugned order whereby the refund claim of the Appellant was allowed after relying upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs - 2002 (143) E.L.T. 482 (S.C.). 3. The contention of Revenue is that the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Priya Blue Industries v. Commissioner of Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eported in 2009 (236) E.L.T. 23 (Bom.). The contention is that in the above decisions after considering the decision of Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. and Priya Blue Industries (supra) it is held that in case the assessment order is not challenged the refund is not maintainable. Therefore the impugned order is not sustainable. 4. Contention of Respondent is that the Appellant filed the refund clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as remanded to the adjudicating Authority to consider the application of importer regarding re-classification of the goods. Therefore the ratio of the above decision is not applicable in a case where without challenging the assessment order the refund was filed. In view of the above I find merit in the contention of the Revenue. The impugned order is set aside and Appeal is allowed. (Pronounced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
