1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal grants appeal, orders Rs. 18,35,026 refund with interest. Legal principles upheld.</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the refund of Rs. 18,35,026/- to the appellant, along with interest as per the notified rate. The decision was ... Refund - Pre-deposit - Adjudication - Interest, pre-deposit Issues:Appeal challenging refund rejection of pre-deposit and duty amount.Analysis:The appellant, engaged in glass bottle manufacturing, challenged an order demanding differential duty, which was finalized at about Rs. 22.46 lakhs. The Commissioner (Appeals) directed a pre-deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs, later remanding the matter for re-adjudication. The Assistant Commissioner then confirmed a demand of Rs. 1,05,74,371/-. The appellant filed a refund claim after subsequent legal proceedings, which was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner for various reasons, including unjust enrichment concerns.The appellant contended that the pre-deposit amount should be refunded as it was treated as payment towards duty erroneously. Citing legal precedents, the appellant argued that the pre-deposit continued to be so, especially after the original order was set aside. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's argument that the appellant couldn't claim a refund due to not challenging a specific order.Regarding the duty amount of Rs. 3,35,026/- paid provisionally, the Tribunal referred to legal judgments stating that such payments are not governed by specific sections. It held that the appellant was entitled to the refund of the entire amount, including interest on the pre-deposit and duty refundable. The order rejecting the refund was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, directing payment within specified timelines.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the refund of Rs. 18,35,026/- to the appellant, along with interest as per the notified rate. The decision was based on legal principles and precedents, ensuring the appellant's entitlement to the refund amounts.