2018 (7) TMI 997

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bunal and vide Final Order No. 40880/2016 dated 3.6.2016, Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant observing that the appellant is entitled to cash refund to the tune of Rs. 11,03,303/. The factum of final order was intimated to the department requesting for refund of the said amount. However, the adjudicating authority passed an order dated 20.1.2017 observing that the appellant is not eligible for refund of Rs. 8,13,869/- and sanctioned only part of the amount to the tune of Rs. 2,89,487/-. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Aggrieved, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri T.R. Ramesh submitted that the very same issue as to whether the appellant is eligible for cr....

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 appellant is eligible for cash refund of Rs. 11,03,303/-. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced as under for better appreciation:- "Heard both sides in the matter. The issue to be decided is as to whether the appellants are eligible for cash refund of Rs. 11,03,303/- on account of credit under transitional provisions in terms of Rule 57H of erstwhile CER 1944. In this case, it is very clear that the appellants were prevented from taking of credit due to the objections from the department and the contention of the appellant that had the department granted refund in the year 1994 itself, the appellant would not have made the payment by cash from the PLA and due to the dispute being not settled for 16 years, the appe....