2009 (7) TMI 1134

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Respondent. ORDER Revenue filed this appeal against order of the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby it has been held that the respondents are entitled to refund of unutilized credit of Rs. 4,98,588/- in cash. 2. Relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondents filed a refund claim of pre-deposit amounting to Rs. 6,58,588/-. The original authority sanctioned the refund claim a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. UOI, reported in 2009 (91) RLT 212 (P&H). He further submits that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Gauri Plasticulture (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Indore, reported in 2006 (202) E.L.T. 199 (Tri.-Mum.) held that if the assessee is maintaining Modvat credit and is in a position to use the same in future clearan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case of DCM Fabrics (supra) following the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of UOI v. Slovak India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2006 (201) E.L.T. 559 (Kar.) held that the assessee's factory is closed and surrendered their central excise registration and the Cenvat credit would be refunded in cash. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) also allowed the refund in cash f....