2005 (6) TMI 496

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eet Biswas, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.P. Bohra, Member (J)]. - Heard Shri K.K. Sanyal, JDR and Shri Abhijeet Biswas, Advocate for Respondent. Mr. Sanyal submits that nowhere in the Central Excise Rules, the Appellant is authorized to take credit on such excess payment made by him and detected before submission of the return. Therefore, he submits that the contention of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsp;  Unicast P. Ltd. v. Commr. of C. Ex., Meerut - 2000 (122) E.L.T. 734 (Tribunal). Therefore, he submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has committed error in allowing the refund. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed. 2. Learned Advocate supports the impugned order. He submits that the Credit Note has been issued and no incident of duty has been passed on to the buyer. Therefor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant had credited amount in PLA without proper authority. If the duty was assessed by the Appellant, is the paid in excess than what is payable. The said duty shall be refunded in accordance with Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944. The Appellant is not authorized to take the credit on excess payment wrongly made by him and detected before submission of the return. There is nothing on ....