New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 887 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (9) TMI 887 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Refund claim - Entitlement - Assistant Commissioner, after allowing the refund claim had adjusted the same against the outstanding dues - appellants accepted the said order of the Asstt. Commissioner and did not challenge it before any higher appellate forum - Held that:- when the matter was remanded by the Tribunal in the earlier proceedings and reached the Commissioner (Appeals) in denovo proceedings, he again passed the order in favour of the assess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is decided, based upon the outcome of the same, the appellants entitlement to refund would be decided accordingly. - Decided against the appellant - Excise Appeal No. 51317 of 2016- Ex (SM) - Order No. FO/53534 /2016-Ex (SM) - Dated:- 7-9-2016 - Hon'ble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Shri Naveen Mullick, Advocate for the Appellants Shri R K Mishra, AR for the Respondent ORDER Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa After hearing both sides, I find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eal thus making them entitled to the refund of deposited amount. The appellants accordingly, filed claim for refund as a consequence of the Commissioner (Appeals) order. The said refund claim was taken up for adjudication by the original adjudicating authority who sanctioned the same but appropriated it towards the outstanding demand of ₹ 8 crores approx. 3. The appellants did not challenge the above order of the original adjudicating authority before any higher appellate forum. In the mea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

earlier sanctioned by the Asstt. Commissioner but appropriated against the confirmed demand in some other matter. The said refund claim was rejected by the Asstt. Commissioners on the ground that same has already been once adjudicated and appropriated towards outstanding demand and as such, the same cannot be remitted to the assessee The appellant filed an appeal against the said order of the Asstt. Commissioner before Commissioners (Appeals), who also observed that refund claim having already b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellant to deposit Rs. six crores. The said stay order was challenged by the appellant before the Hon ble Delhi High Court, who reduced the amount of deposit to ₹ 1.50 crores, with the directions to give bond for the balance amount. Such order of the Hon ble Delhi High Court stand complied with by them. It is the contention of the appellant that the directions of the Hon ble Delhi High Court having been complied with by them by depositing an amount of ₹ 1.50 crores in cash, ther .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version