2011 (4) TMI 488

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....espondent   Per: Ashok Jindal   1. The appellants are in appeal against the impugned order, wherein their appeal was rejected on the ground that the appellant has no locus standi to file the appeal.   2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s.CEAT Ltd., Waluj had a plant at Waluj for the manufacture of tyres tubes, flaps, etc. The said plant was sold to the appellants on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an appeal against the said order and an appeal was also filed by the appellant against the rejection of the refund claim of M/s.CEAT Ltd. The lower appellate authority has rejected the appeal of the appellant holding that the appellant has no locus standi to file the present appeal as the appellant cannot be held to an aggrieved person in this case as refund claim has not been filed by them. Aggri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....siner Central Excise & Customs Aurangabad Division II as to why their refund claim should not be rejected on the grounds mentioned above under provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944.   6. From the above extract of the show-cause notice, it is clear that the show-cause notice has been issued to the appellant earlier. Therefore, the observation of the lower appellate authority....