2007 (5) TMI 487

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 35F of CEA, 1944, for due compliance of the stay order and for maintainability of appeal pending before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide final order dated 12-10-1994 was pleased to decide in favour of the appellants by setting aside the demands and impugned order by way of remand. After receipt of the said Tribunal order the appellant in the present case had filed the refund claim for the said sum deposited. The refund claim was never paid to the appellants. However on 9-11-1995, the Jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner, Aurangabad division II, had informed the appellants that the amount of Rs. 10 lakhs is being recovered under Section 11A of Central Excise & Salt Act for the confirmed demand of Rs. 76,50,193/- covered in Order-in-Origi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amount. 3. On 12-7-2001 the Jurisdictional Superintendent had issued a show cause notice-cum hearing notice directing the appellants to show cause to the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad II Division as to why the refund claim should not be restricted to Rs. 10 lakhs i.e. duty amount recovered and the interest of Rs. 8,12,500/- should not be rejected. On due adjudication by Order-in-Original the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad sanctioned refund of Rs. 10 lakhs and rejected interest of Rs. 8,12,500/-. A part amount of Rs. 4,89,843/- was again appropriated against some other unconnected demands which were pending under appeals during the material time and the only balance amount of Rs. 5,10,157/- was paid t....