2014 (7) TMI 525

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No.33/2007 (Ahd-II) CE/Raju/Commr (A) dated 28.03.2007 under which appeal of the appellant was rejected by upholding that cash refund is not admissible to the appellant for an amount which was originally paid from RG-23 Part-II. 2. Shri Dhaval Shah (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that cash refund of payments made from RG-23 Part II is admissible as per the following case l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s vs. CCE, Ludhiana [2012 (26) STR 27 (Tri. Larger Bench). It was his case that the ratio of the law laid down by the Larger Bench in the case of Steel Strips vs. CCE Ludhiana (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case and appeal filed by the appellant is required to be rejected. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present proceedings i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp;   "5.16 Modvat law has codified procedure for adjustment of duty liability against Modvat Account. That is required to be carried out in accordance with law and unadjusted amount is not expressly permitted to be refunded. In absence of express provision to grant refund, that is difficult to entertain except in the case of export. There cannot be presumption that in the absence of deb....