Finality of appellate refund order bars later challenge to consequential refund sanction and reopening of settled entitlement.

A consequential refund order could not be used to reopen a refund entitlement already concluded by an earlier appellate order that had attained finality. Because the Collector (Appeals) had set aside the original rejection of refund and recognised entitlement, and the department did not challenge that decision in time, the issue was no longer open in a later appeal against the refund sanction. The objection based on retrospective approval of price lists should have been raised in the earlier proceedings and could not be introduced after finality attached to the appellate order. The challenge to the consequential refund order was therefore not maintainable, and the refund entitlement remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund sanctioned pursuant to an earlier appellate order could be challenged in an appeal against the consequential refund order when the appellate order allowing refund had already attained finality.

Analysis: The earlier order of the Collector (Appeals) had already set aside the rejection of refund and recognised the respondent's entitlement to refund. The department did not challenge that order in time. A subsequent appeal against the consequential refund sanction order could not be used to reopen the concluded issue of entitlement to refund. The objection regarding retrospective approval of the price lists was a matter that ought to have been raised in the earlier proceedings and could not be permitted after the appellate order had become final.

Conclusion: The challenge to the consequential refund order was not maintainable, and the respondent's entitlement to refund remained undisturbed.

---