https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48495 The High Court ruled that if a liability has been discharged by deposit, the Department cannot appropriate a refund amount. The Court emphasized the Department must act in accordance with the law and not dishonestly retain or recover money. It was also held that the Commissioner (Appeals) exceeded jurisdiction by making observations on compliance and refund possibilities. The Court directed the Department to pass a final order within three months, allowing the respondent to challenge the appropriation based on earlier deposits. en-us Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Aug 2010 17:59:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48495 The High Court ruled that if a liability has been discharged by deposit, the Department cannot appropriate a refund amount. The Court emphasized the Department must act in accordance with the law and not dishonestly retain or recover money. It was also held that the Commissioner (Appeals) exceeded jurisdiction by making observations on compliance and refund possibilities. The Court directed the Department to pass a final order within three months, allowing the respondent to challenge the appropriation based on earlier deposits. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48495