Refund claim from unappropriated payment sustained where the revenue failed to challenge non-appropriation in the adjudication order.

Where an amount paid by the assessee was not appropriated in the adjudication order, it could be treated as refundable, and the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in allowing the assessee to take steps for refund. Since the revenue did not challenge the adjudication order on the issue of non-appropriation, there was no infirmity in granting such relief, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amount paid by the respondents, but not appropriated in the adjudication order, could be treated as refundable and whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in permitting the respondents to take appropriate steps for refund.

Analysis: The adjudicating authority had not appropriated the amount lying with the revenue. In these circumstances, and since the revenue had not challenged the adjudication order on the question of appropriation, there was no infirmity in the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing the respondents to pursue refund.

Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the respondents, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order permitting refund-related steps was sustained, and the revenue's challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an amount paid is not appropriated in the adjudication order, the assessee may be permitted to pursue refund and the revenue cannot resist such relief without successfully challenging the absence of appropriation.

---