2014 (9) TMI 805

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rders contained price variation clause, and thus they had paid excise duty on cylinders on the prices provisionally given. The Oil industry finalized the prices downwards resulting in the reduced value/price. The assessee filed the refund claim of excess duty paid to the tune of Rs. 39,40,086/- (1-7-1999 to 31-3-2004) under Section 11B of the CEA. The claim was rejected as it was filed after one year (time-bar) vide O-I-O No. 20/2004, dated 13-7-2004. Aggrieved by the order, they appealed before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide O-I-A No. 11/2005(HI)-C.E., dated 31-1-2005, set aside the said orders of the Asst. Commissioner. Consequently, the Assistant Commissioner sanctioned the refund claim of Rs. 39,40,086/- vide his O-I-O dated 21-4-2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mediately after the expiry of 3 months from the date of receipt of such application till the date of refund of such duty and not payment of interest immediately after the expiry of 3 months from the date of payment of such duty till the date of refund. 2. The O-I-O No. 4/2006, dated 13-1-2006 was reviewed and the Assistant Commissioner was directed to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The impugned order is the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the appeal filed by the Revenue after review. 3. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has taken a view that after the refund was sanctioned, instead of filing the appeal the Department should have issued a show cause notice under Section 11A for rec....