2016 (3) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Appellant : Shri Amit Jain, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R.K. Grover, Authorized Representative (DR) ORDER Per B. Ravichandran These two appeals are dealing with the same issue of appellant s claim for refund of amount paid as 8% of value of exempted goods in terms of Rule 57CC of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engage....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....time, the appellant s liability to pay under Rule 57CC was examined and decided by the Tribunal in the appellant s own case vide final order No. 538-545/2007 dated 31/10/2007. The matter further reached the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court reported in 2008 (223) E.L.T. 149 (Raj.) and Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2014 (303) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.). The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the provisions of R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7CC in respect of exempted sulphuric acid has not reached the finality and, hence, no refund could be considered of the already paid amount. The Commissioner (Appeals) in both the impugned order held that the appellants paid the amount now claimed as refund under protest. No other findings were given. 3. During the course of argument, the learned AR as well as the learned Counsel for the appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id the provisions of Rule 57CC cannot be made applicable in the facts and circumstances of the appellant s case. As such, no amount is payable by the appellant on this ground. It follows that the amount already paid has to be refunded to them. Both the sides agree that provisions of Section 11B will not apply as the payment under Rule 57CC is not as Excise duty. It is only an amount equivalent to ....