TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (11) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Respondent. [Order]. - These are five appeals posted for admission today. After hearing both the sides for some time, I am of the view that the issue involved is very short which can be disposed of finally. I, therefore, admit all the five appeals. 2. In all these appeals, condonation of delay applications has also been filed. Shri H.B. Sharma, learned Advocate pointed out that all the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the Tribunal in Prag Vanaspati Products v. Collector of C. Ex. reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 325 in which it was held that the refund application may be treated to have been received on behalf of the Assistant Collector. He also relied upon the decision in the case of C.C.E. v. Fort William Co. Ltd. reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 339 (T) in which it was observed that the Supdt. is an Officer o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me of receiving the same. There was sufficient time, almost one month, available with the appellants to re-submit the refund claim to the proper officer i.e. Assistant Collector which was not done by the appellants and therefore the ratio of the decision relied upon by the appellants is not applicable to the facts of the present matters. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions of both....