2008 (7) TMI 336

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... [Order]. - Appellants have filed written submissions which I have gone through. Dr. M.K. Rajak, ld. SDR appeared for the Revenue. 2. As per facts on record, proceedings for confirmation of demand of duty were initiated against the appellants by way of issuance of a show cause notice. Appellants approached the Settlement Commissioner, who vide their admission order dt. 2-9-2005 directed them t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ions of Board's Circular No. 275/37/2000-CX.8A dt. 2-1-2002 laying down that deposit is required to be considered other than duty amount and should be returned immediately on the claimant claiming the same vide a simple letter, will not apply in the present case inasmuch as in the matters before Settlement Commissioner the appellants are not disputing liability but are admitting the same. Therefor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ied upon Hon'ble Bombay High Court's decision in the case of M/s. Nelco Ltd. v. UOI [2002 (144) E.L.T. 56 (Bom.)], which stands confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court when the appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected as reported in 2002 (144) E.L.T. A-104 (S.C.). 4. I agree with the appellant that there is no difference between the deposits made in terms of the Tribunal's order or under the dir....