TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (6) TMI 345
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)]. - These two appeals being inter linked are being disposed, by this common order, after hearing both sides as - (a) Appeals E/1596/03 by Revenue is on the order of CCE(A) ordering a remand of the matter. The ground taken by Revenue is that CCE(A) was not empowered to remand the matters due to an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ince duty of Rs. 25,12,218 originally paid on HDPE tapes could be granted as refund, subject to unjust enrichment bar. This amount cannot be enhanced due to remand on the Tribunal dated 29-6-2000 which was only on order of unjust enrichment. Therefore, reworking the duty on the basis of duty payable on the exempted goods is not proper. (ii) Duty on tapes of Rs. 25,12,218/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which go to make tape would be available, if tapes are to discharge duty at tape stage & then, such tape duty, if not taken credit, would entitle benefit of Notification 53/88 to sacks. The duty demands on sacks would be upheld if tapes do not discharge duty. The refund of duty on sacks would therefore be dependent upon the position of duty discharge on tapes. The entire issues is now to be rework....