TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent authority concerned has recovered the amount of demand from the petitioners more than 10% of the demand which finally arises from the order of the Commissioner after reduction, which action is not legally sustainable in view of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with Circular No. 1053/2/2017-CX, dated 10.3.2017 F.No.96/1/2017-CX.I date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by its representation dated 28th March, 202, which according to the petitioners is still pending and has not been considered though according to the petitioners, petitioners are entitled for refund of the same since the petitioners have already filed the appeal before the Appellate Authority concerned by making mandatory pre-deposit of 10% of the demand arising out of the original adjudication or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing for the respondents, CGST Authority concerned opposes this writ petition by contending that for refund of the excess amount beyond 10 % of the demand arising out of the original order, petitioners should approach the Tribunal before which the appeal is pending and he further submits that the decisions petitioners want to rely are distinguishable and not applicable to the facts and circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
