2016 (12) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er case; Appeal against which was pending before the first Appellate authority. Further, I find subsequently, the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) set aside confirmation Order of the Adjudicating authority by its order dt 7.12.2012. Thus, in my view, appropriation of the rebate claim does not survive. In the result, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is upheld and Revenue’s appeals being devo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad but appropriated against the confirmed demand of ₹ 12,19,882/- passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise by Order dt 09.4.2008; Appeals against which was pending before first Appellate authority . Aggrieved by the said arbitrary appropriation of the amount, the respondent filed appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... which has been set aside by the first appellate authority, is untenable in law. 6. I find that the Adjudicating Authority, while disposing the rebate claim though sanctioned it, but appropriated the said amount against the demand confirmed in some other case; Appeal against which was pending before the first Appellate authority. Further, I find subsequently, the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X