2018 (10) TMI 631 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI – Appropriation of refund sanctioned against the outstanding interest amounts – finalization of provisional assessment – whether the sanctioned refunds have to be made in cash or in RG 23A Part-II as credit? – Held that:- On being questioned learned Advocate fairly agrees that such duties were originally paid out of the credit account only and not in cash. He has further fairly agreed that the appellant is in a position to use the said credited amount for payment of duties in future. If that be so, I really fail to understand the appellant’s contention to receive refunded amounts in cash.
–
The duties having been paid out of the credit amount has to be refunded to the credit account only and
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
that the said sanctioned refund claim has to be allowed as a credit to the assessee in their RG-23A Part-II, whereas the interest has to be paid in cash. As such the adjustment of the refunded amount with the outstanding interest was not proper. The assessee also filed a Cross Objection against the said order of the Original Adjudicating Authority contending that the said appropriation was not proper inasmuch as there was Stay against the interest confirmation and there was no indication in the order of the Original Adjudicating Authority as to against which interest demand, adjustment has been shown by him. It was also pleaded that whatever interest demands are pending against the assessee, the same have been stayed by the Higher Appellat
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
s. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-I reported at 2004 (171) ELT 487 (Tri.- Bang.). Hence the present appeal by assessee. 4. It is seen that the said decision of the Tribunal relied upon by Commissioner (Appeals) stand overruled by the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Southern Auto Products vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. Bangalore-I reported at 2009 (244) ELT 348 (Kar.). As such I agree with the learned Advocate that the Cross Objections were maintainable before the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. As regards merits of the case, it is seen that a common cause of grievance between Revenue and the appellant before Commissioner (Appeals) was that such sanctioned refund claim cannot be adjusted against the outstanding interest amounts
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =