1999 (12) TMI 664

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R.K. Sharma, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. -  The appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 14-11-91 whereby the refund claim of Rs. 2,03,856.51 filed by the appellants was rejected. 2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that in the dispute relating to the classification of Switch fuses of various ki....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Collector (Appeals) for deposit of the whole of the duty demand. The Hon'ble High Court directed the appellants to deposit one third of the duty demand and in compliance to this order, the appellant deposited Rs. 2,03,856.51 as pre-deposit for hearing of the appeal. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants. Thereafter, appellants filed an appeal befo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de the orders passed by the Assistant Collector. He submits that in the letter written by Supdt. dated 17-8-89 it was specifically mentioned that their product is classifiable under Heading 8537.00. On withdrawal of the appeal before the CEGAT, the demand for duty classifying the product under Heading 8536.90 is liable to be set aside and the appellants are entitled for the refund. He, therefore, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appeal before the Collector of Central Excise. The appeal filed by the appellants for classifying their product was dismissed by the Collector of Central Excise upholding the order passed by the adjudicating authority for classifying their product under heading 8536.90. Thereafter, the appellants filed the appeal before the CEGAT which was withdrawn by the appellants. In this situation the or....