9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1073X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rabh Bagaria, Adv. & Shri Indranil Banerjeefor the Respondent ORDER PER CORAM The respondent was a manufacturer of Vanaspati. Vanaspati was exempted from payment of duty during the period24.7.1996 to 28.2.2003. At the time of exemption on 23.7.1996 the respondent was availing the credit of inputs under the Money Credit Scheme and had accumulated a balance of unutilized credit amounting to Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 4.10crore from the said PLA balance on 19.01.2006. The refund claim was rejected after issue of a Show Cause Notice, by order dated 15.6.2006. However the refund was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dated 14.09.2006. The order of the Commissioner(Appeals)was challenged by Revenue before this Tribunal which rejected the appeal by order dated 15.01.2008. The issue was carried ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he impugned order dated 26.03.2009 in which the appeal was allowed and the Original Authority was directed to implement the same and pay refund. The Department filed the present appeal challenging the Order in Appeal dated 26.03.2009. 4.With the above background heard both sides. 5.It is seen that the basic issue is the grant of refund of Rs. 4.1 crores sought by the respondent. This issue stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
