2006 (12) TMI 25

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hot rolled patta/patti into cold rolled patta/patti, which was considered as amounting to manufacture and consequently a demand of Rs. 50,084/- was raised against them. The appellants paid Rs. 21,990/- against the above demand during the course of investigation. The goods were lying in the factory valued at Rs. 12,40,848/- were also seized which were confiscated by the Assistant Commissioner but .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The refund was sanctioned to them but the claim of interest on the refund amount was rejected on the ground that the duty was not paid under protest. 2.Ld. Advocate for the appellants submits that entire amount of Rs. 2,69,032/- which comprises of Rs. 2 lakhs as cash security in lieu of confiscation, Rs. 21,990/- as duty paid before issue of show cause notice, Rs. 28,094/- as pre-deposit of duty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... E.L.T. 840 (Tri.-Chennai) in which it has been held that duty paid by filing an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) to contest the adjudication order is payment of duty under protest. Similarly, in the case of Manik Machinery Mfrs. Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, 2003 (157) E.L.T. 439 (Tri.-Mumbai) it was held that duty being paid during pendency of appeal has to be deemed to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X