2012 (12) TMI 935

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....R. Kulkarni, Dy. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER All these 44 appeals are filed by the appellant M/s. Indorama Synthetic (I) Ltd., against the impugned order wherein the rebate/refund claim was sanctioned but adjusted the said amount against in some other proceeding on the premise that the amount is payable by the appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s dismissed for non-compliance of stay order. The appellant filed a revision application before the Joint Secretary (Revisionary Authority) who also dismissed their stay application and asked the appellant to make a pre-deposit of 100% demand. The said order was challenged by the appellant in Writ Petition No. 3852/11 before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay, on 21-9-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es. The bank guarantee is still alive and the proceedings before the Revisionary Authority is still pending. Therefore, adjusting against the pre-matured demand is not sustainable as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of National Steel Industries Ltd. v. Union of India - 2001 (134) E.L.T. 616 (M.P.) and CCE, Bangalore-III v. Stella Rubber Works (Unit-II) - 2012 (275) E.L.....