2018 (8) TMI 307

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent(s): Shri G.M. Sharma (AR) ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein refund of Rs. 3,88,550/- has been rejected by the authorities below. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant initially working as Nick Auto Industries which later on converted into Nick Auto industries Pvt. Ltd. with effect from 01.05.2008 and whatever inp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant and for recovery of interest during the intervening period and proposed penalty on the appellant. The matter was adjudicated, the refund claim was denied and interest during the intervening period was demanded and penalty was also imposed. The said order was carried before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeal) who hold that as the appellant has not challenged the order of regularization of Cenv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsferred to the new unit as per the audit conducted by the Revenue, it is a fact on record that unit has been transferred only on 01.05.2008 and on the said day, they were having a balance of Rs. 5,66,983/- therefore, there was no question to transfer of Rs. 9,53,533/-, in that circumstances, the appellant was no required to reverse of Rs. 3,88,550/- which appellant has reversed on 14.05.2012 and ....