2011 (5) TMI 338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner(Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. The respondents have made a request for adjournment. However, we find that the order can be passed even in their absence. Accordingly, we have heard the ld.SDR Shri J.S. Negi and have gone through the impugned order passed by Commissioner(Appeals).   2. As per facts on record, the respondent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed the claim on the ground that instead of filing one consolidated refund claim for each quarter, as required in terms of Rule 5, the appellants have filed separate refund claims in respect of input credit and input service credit.   3. On appeal against above order, the Commissioner(Appeals), took note of the Tribunal s decision in the case of CCE Jaipur Vs. Bhilwara Spinners Ltd. 2008 (2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....efund is allowed, not sustainable for the reason that in this case, respondents are getting the refund of the excise duty which they paid on the raw material used in the manufacture of exported goods. Under the advance licence scheme, the respondents are entitled to get the duty free material. The said duty free material may be replenished towards home consumption and set off is available to the r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be condoned. The findings of Commissioner(Appeals) on the said issue are not being assailed by Revenue, inasmuch as we find that there is no ground to the above effect. The challenge in the present appeal is to Commissioner(Appeals) s finding for allowing refund claim of credit in terms of Rule 5, on the ground of availing of the benefit Notification No.93/2004-Cus, amounts to double benefit to t....