https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1606 The Court upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, finding the appellant's double payment of duty unjustified. The initial payment via Cenvat Account did not fulfill duty demand as there was no balance in P.L.A. at that time. Subsequent payment through P.L.A. was deemed appropriate under Range Superintendent's direction. The reversal of Cenvat credit entry due to double discharge of liability was unsupported, leading to dismissal of appeal against Adjudication Order. The Court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, concluding the dismissal of the appeal was justified based on available records. en-us Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Apr 2008 07:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1606 The Court upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, finding the appellant's double payment of duty unjustified. The initial payment via Cenvat Account did not fulfill duty demand as there was no balance in P.L.A. at that time. Subsequent payment through P.L.A. was deemed appropriate under Range Superintendent's direction. The reversal of Cenvat credit entry due to double discharge of liability was unsupported, leading to dismissal of appeal against Adjudication Order. The Court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, concluding the dismissal of the appeal was justified based on available records. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1606