2017 (8) TMI 68

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s in appeal against the impugned orders wherein the refund claims filed by the appellants were rejected on the ground that the demand for which they filed refund claims has already been held against them. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of cement/clinker falling under Chapter 25 of the First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They availe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l, 2004 to September, 2004, the appellant reversed the cenvat credit under protest and intimated to the department. No proceedings were initiated against the appellant for appropriation of the amount paid under protest. 4. Later on, in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of M/s Vikrarm Cements reported in 2006 (194) ELT 3(SC),  wherein it has been held that the in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ge or not? 8. In this case, it is admitted fact that the appellant reversed the cenvat credit under protest which was never appropriated by any authorities at any stage. In that circumstance, without appropriation of the said amount by the authorities below, the same was remained as deposit. Further, I find that in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vikram Cements ....