https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272057 The High Court ordered that the refund of an amount deposited by the respondent should be decided by the Department after hearing the petitioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appropriation against the dues of another individual was not legally sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence supporting the appropriation decision and upheld the findings of the impugned order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The decision underscored the necessity of legal and factual basis for appropriation decisions and appeals to be considered. en-us Thu, 21 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Oct 2016 15:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272057 The High Court ordered that the refund of an amount deposited by the respondent should be decided by the Department after hearing the petitioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the appropriation against the dues of another individual was not legally sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence supporting the appropriation decision and upheld the findings of the impugned order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The decision underscored the necessity of legal and factual basis for appropriation decisions and appeals to be considered. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272057