2003 (1) TMI 496
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... - In this appeal, the appellants have questioned the validity of the impugned Order-in-Appeal, dated 30-6-2002/9-7-2002 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he had affirmed the Order-in-Original of the A.C. dated 6-4-1998 who ordered appropriation of Rs. 1,23,690/- on account of interest payment, from the refund claim of Rs. 5,00,000/- of the appellants. 2. The facts are not m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Commissioner that the appellants would be liable to pay interest under Section 11AA of the Act. The Tribunal also while affirming those orders did not order the recovery of interest from the appellants on the disallowed Modvat credit. Therefore, the adjudicating authority could not legally order recovery of the interest from the payment of the disputed amount, on the delayed payment of the credi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which the Modvat credit was disallowed to the appellants was prior to that. Therefore, the adjudicating authority, under these circumstances, ordered the recovery of interest from the appellants and appropriation of the same from the refund claim. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) had also wrongly endorsed and affirmed the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority. The bare perusal of the ....