2012 (11) TMI 69

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ommissioner, for the Appellant. Shri L.R. Das, Consultant, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard both sides. 2. Revenue is in appeal against order in appeal No. 24-25/Kol- VII/2011 dated 9-2-2011 whereby Commissioner (Appeal) upheld the lower adjudicating authority's order granting the refund. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent submitted a ref....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elied upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of Commr. of C. Ex., Pune-I v. Poona Rolling Mills Ltd. reported in 2007 (220) E.L.T. 907 (Tri.-Mumbai) = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 643 (Tri. - Mumbai) & Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. v. Commr. of C. Ex. & Customs reported in 2005 (181) E.L.T. 328 (S.C.). 5. The contention of the respondent is that it is a case of refund of deposit and not of duty t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t applicable in this case. So far as the Tribunal's decision in the case of Poona Rolling Mills Ltd. (supra), the case was remanded for examining as to whether the respondents passed on duty burden to their customers. In the case of Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. (supra) by the Ld. A.R., while dealing with the case of rebate on excess production of sugar the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "all ....