2013 (2) TMI 229

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Navneet, Additional Commissioner (AR) Per: Ashok Jindal: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim has been rejected as pre- mature. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant M/s Raymond Ltd. had imported SAP software from SAP AG, a German corporation. There was a dispute regarding the valuation of the goods; therefore, the DRI, Bangalo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the amount deposited by them during the course of investigation has not been adjusted against any duty demand therefore, the same has to be refunded. He also relies on various decisions of this Tribunal as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana such as Ganesh Enterprises vs. CCE, Ahmedabad 2009 (2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is why adjudication could not be taken place till date. He further submits that the amount pre-deposited by the appellant during the course of investigation being voluntarily, the decisions relied on by the appellant is not relevant to the facts of this case as in those cases the payment was made under force. He further submits that the payment made by the appellant is to be deemed under section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a has reported the facts that "there is no amount outstanding against the petitioner but still under duress and threat the partners of the petitioner were forced to deposit the draft of Rs.1 crore and post dated cheques of Rs.1.5 crores. The fact is disputed by the counsel for the respondents. He states that the said draft was deposited by the partners of the petitioner along with the cheques volu....