2020 (1) TMI 1348

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ocate For the Respondent : Shri Anil Choudhary, Deputy Commissioner (AR) ORDER PER: C J MATHEW This appeal of M/s Dhariwal Industries Ltd challenges the rejection of their claim for refund of Rs. 75,00,000, deposited during investigations into evasion of duties of central excise, by the original, and first appellate authority, as being premature in view of proceedings pending before the adjudi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tions. 3. While the original authority issued notice dated 4th February 2005 for, and confirmed thereafter, rejection of the claim as the dispute was yet pending for de novo adjudication, the appeal of assessee was rejected in order in-appeal no. P III/433/05 dated 6th December 2005 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune on the ground that the issue relating to reversal of MODVAT credi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eposited during investigation. Whether such amount is available for disposition by the central excise authorities or not, any confirmation of recovery under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest and penalty, is recoverable under appropriate provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944. The amount deposited is not a limiting factor nor the only source of such recovery. 7. Even if .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X