9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate for the appellant Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) for the Respondents ORDER Per: Madhu Mohan Damodhar The facts of the case are that M/s. Shasun Chemicals and Drugs Ltd., the appellant herein, are manufacturers of bulk drugs falling under Chapter 30 of the first Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985. The appellants were clearing the said goods for home consumption as well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the rejection of refund claim on the appeals filed by the appellant to Commissioner (Appeals) were rejected vide the impugned orders both dt. 30.06.2008 . Hence these appeals. 2. On 1.11.2017 when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of the appellants, Ld. Advocate, V. Ravindran made oral and written submissions which can be broadly summarized as under : (i) The appellant did not challen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ogue at the material time. (iv) Ld. Advocate also submits that on the very issue in their own case for an earlier period, the matter has been held in their favour as reported in 2010 (254) ELT 346 (Tri.-Chennai) and 2010 (255) ELT 592 (Tri.-Chennai). 3. On the other hand, on behalf of department, Ld.A.R Shri B. Balamurugan supports the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides and have gone through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim was made within the time limit prescribed and since the department itself has chosen to allow a part of the rebate, supplementary claim filed by the appellants cannot be held to be time barred. As such, the impugned order is set aside and the authority below is directed to sanction refund of the balance amount, if otherwise due by way of credit in the Cenvat account. The appeal is allowed i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
