2020 (5) TMI 472

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Authorised Representative for the respondent ORDER ASHOK JINDAL: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein part refund has been granted to them and refund of Rs. 4,97,809/- was held not admissible to them. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of tyres and availed certain cenvat credit, during the period 01.04.2004 to 31.12.2004 wherein cenvat credit sought to b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... missioner (Appeals) who held that as various demands for calculation are pending, therefore, the appeal is premature and liable to be set aside. Against the said order, appellant is before me. 3. Heard the parties. 4. On perusal of the record, I find that while entertaining the refund claim, the adjudicating authority has observed that refund claim of Rs. 4,97,809/- has been withdrawn by the app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of seven days of receipt of this order shall quantify the actual amount of refund. The appellant shall also cooperate with the adjudicating authority. The whole exercise should be done within a period of one month of receipt of the order of this Tribunal by the adjudicating authority. 6. The appeal is allowed by way of remand. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
Case laws, Decisions, Ju .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X