2006 (12) TMI 366

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellants herein assail the impugned order dated 04-01-2006 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Mumbai Zone-II which in turn confirm the Order-in-Original by rejecting the refund claim for Rs. 4,24,415/-. In order to appreciate the contentions raised by both sides, the facts involves in this appeal may....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to file application for extension of stay order. In the meanwhile as alleged by appellants herein, the Department has forced and collected Rs. 4,24,415/- on 21-3-2005 (29-3-2005 realized on Bank). Thereafter, the Tribunal has considered the application filed by the appellant and extended the stay order dated 1-4-2005.  Since the stay order has become operative and in force from the beginning....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....side various demands confirmed in the adjudicatory proceedings. The Id. Advocate for the appellants contends that the Impugned order in this appeal is perverse and without application of mind. According to him extension of stay order was passed in his absence and there was no occasion to represent about the payment collected  by the Department under coercion. Furthermore, the proceedings init....