2005 (1) TMI 449

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri U. Raja Ram, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. -  The appellants are aggrieved with OIA No. 6/2002-C.E., dated 4-1-2002 by which their claim for refund has been rejected on the ground of time-bar. It is seen from the facts of the case as delineated in OIO itself that the appellants had filed a price list on 10-10-1975 indicating the cost of Portla....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich has not been refunded to them on the ground of time-bar alone. 2. The learned Consultant points out from the undisputed facts of the case are that the duty was paid under protest and an appeal was also filed against the order of assessment directing them to deposit the duty. In that circumstance, the findings recorded that the refund is hit by time-bar is not a correct finding. He sub....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kota Oxygen v. C.C.E., Jaipur - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 889 (Tri) = 2000 (41) RLT 721 (CEGAT). He also relied on the Calcutta High Court judgment rendered in the case of ACCE, Calcutta v. Bata Shoe Co. (P) Ltd - 2004 (169) E.L.T. 3 (Cal.) and the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of India Cements Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1989 (41) E.L.T. 358 (S.C.). 3. The learned DR defended the order and praye....