TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y paid the amount of ₹ 17,44,041/- in their own name - The refund has been denied stating that the amount so paid is lying in the PLA account of M/s. Kanishk Steel Industries and, therefore, the appellant is not eligible for refund. Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court of Madras, in the case of M/s. Sundaram Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE Madurai [2015 (5) TMI 416 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], had conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7,44,041/- on the ground that they made double payment during the month of June, 2014. The appellant-company came into existence after demerger of the company, namely, M/s. Kanishk Steel Industries Limited, as per the High Court Order dated 04.01.2013. After such demerger, on 20.02.2013, the appellant, which had come into existence, had obtained Central Excise Registration on 31.03.2013. For the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Ltd. On realizing the mistake on the very same day, the appellant had paid the amount to their own Central Excise Account/ECC. The refund has been denied stating that the amount so paid is lying in the PLA account of M/s. Kanishk Steel Industries and, therefore, the appellant is not eligible for refund. He adverted to para 2 of the order, in original, and argued that along with the refund claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of excess payment; iii. Signed Bank Statement for the month of July 2014. iv. Disclaimer Certificate of M/s. Kanishk Steel Industries Ltd., (Sponge Iron Division) 6. The only ground on which the refund has been rejected is that the amount is lying in the PLA account of M/s. Kanishk Steel Industries and, therefore, without proper No Objection Certificate from the said company the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the appellant herein. From the above discussions as well as the documents placed before me, I am of the view that the rejection of refund is without any legal or factual basis. I hold that the appellants are eligible for refund. The impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs, if any. ( Operative portion of the order was Pronounced in open court ) - - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
