2008 (2) TMI 757

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Respondent. [Order]. -  This application filed by the Revenue (appellant) is for stay of operation of the impugned order, wherein ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld an order of the original authority granting refund of an amount of Rs. 6,32,000/- to the assessee (respondent). After examining the records and hearing both sides, I am of the view that the appeal of the Revenue itself r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....allowed the refund claim and the first appellate authority sustained the decision. Hence this appeal of the Revenue. 3. The lower appellate authority has relied on the Tribunal's decision in the cases of Lucas TVS Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai, 2006 (206) E.L.T. 839 (T)  = 2004 (97) ECC 456 (Tribunal) and CCE, Chennai v. Aristo Spinners (P) Ltd., 2007 (212) E.L.T. 430 (Tri.-Chennai), wherein b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the impugned order is in keeping with the ruling of the Apex Court rendered in Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. v. Asst. Collector, Ludhiana, 1994 (70) E.L.T. 48 (S.C.), wherein bank guarantee furnished by an assessee under court's order to secure the Revenue was held not amounting to payment of duty of excise and, accordingly, the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act was held inapplicable to ....