2022 (6) TMI 1438

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ati Refinery); (iii) Excise Appeal No.75954 of 2016 (Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Guwahati Vs. M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited); (iv) Excise Appeal No.76508 of 2018 (M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Refinery Division, Haldia Refinery Vs. Commissioner of CGST & CX, Haldia Commissionerate); (v) Excise Miscellaneous Application No.75093 of 2022 (COD) and Excise Appeal No.75164 of 2022 (M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Refinery Division, Haldia Refinery Vs. Commissioner of CGST & CX, Haldia Commissionerate); Hon'ble Shri P. K.Choudhary, Member(Judicial) And Hon'ble Shri P.Anjani Kumar, Member(Technical) For the Appellant : Ms. Romi Agarwal, Manager (Finance) for M/s. IOCL For the Respondent : Shri K.Chowdhury, Au....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was in a delayed manner and in the meantime the Appellants have paid enhanced duties under protest from the date of issuance of the Notification to the date of publication in the Gazette. Accordingly they have filed refund claims for the excess duty they have paid for different periods at different refineries/depots like Patna, Guwahati etc.. The Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has rejected the claims of the Appellants in respect of four Appeals i.e. Excise Appeal Nos. 75944, 75945 of 2016, Excise Appeal No. 76508 of 2018, Excise Appeal No. 75164 of 2022. M/s.IOCL are in appeal against such rejection vide these Appeals. In respect of two Appeals i.e. Excise Appeal Nos. 75872 & 75954 of 2016, the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has accepted the Appellant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....relevant period and therefore, the exemption notifications had not come into force. Consequently, the appellants were not required to pay duty at the enhanced rate during the relevant periods and therefore, any excess duty which they paid was refundable. Accordingly, the order of the lower authority sanctioning the refunds was correct and it is incorrectly set aside by the first appellate authority." 10. We also find that the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) in respect of Appeal No.75872 of 2016 relying on the Apex Court's decision in the case of Union of India Vs. M/s. Param Industries Ltd. and Ors. Has held that - "11. The Appellant cited the case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union of India Vs. M/s. Param Industries Lt....