2017 (3) TMI 502

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER Revenue filed this appeal against Order-in- Appeal No.PII/BKS/382/2005 dated 24-10-2005 whereby Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) rejected the department's appeal. 2.  The fact of the case is that  appellant  filed refund claim for the differential duty paid in excess on the ground that  the CVD was payable at the rate of 30 Rs. Per square meter on goods namely Marble bloc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Revenue is before me. 3.  Shri. Ajay Kumar, Ld. Joint Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal. 4.  None appeared on behalf of the respondent. 5.  I have carefully considered the submissions made by the Ld. A.R. and perused the record. 6.   On going through the records, I came across grave error  in the appeal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the grievance of the Revenue is  that both lower authority  have held that appellant was entitle for the payment of CVD @ Rs. 30 per square meter  on the marble block and not @ 16% advolram.  However refund was rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment.  On this issue I find that adjudicating authority  has clearly held that as regard the merit of the case the i....