2008 (12) TMI 186

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....DR, for the Respondent. [Order].- The challenge in the present appeal is to the rejection of appellant's refund claim by the authorities below. 2. As per the facts on record, the dispute arose for wrong availment of Modvat credit of duty availed by the appellant during the period 18-10-2003 to 3-3-2005. The appellant deposited an amount of Rs. 1,47,560/- vide T.R.-6 challan No. 15 dated 16-3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner by referring to the Tribunal's order vide which even the confirmed demand was set aside on merits, dropped the demand vide his order dated 8-6-2008. 5. The development as recorded above shows that the demand raised against the appellants were finally got dropped either by the Tribunal or by the Assistant Commissioner in his de novo adjudication. Accordingly, the appellants become e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 16-8-2007 that the doctrine of unjust enrichment is not applicable under Section 11B of that, in respect of pre-deposit and procedure under the said Section is not required to be filed. He accordingly, allowed the appeal. The said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was not challenged by the Revenue and as such, attained the finality. 7. Further, the Assistant Commissioner dropped the same dem....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....djudication proceedings, stand finally decided at the level of Commissioner (Appeals), it is not open to the Revenue to conduct adjudication in respect of the same refund claim for the second time. (ii) Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order in appeal No. 55/07 dated 6-8-2007 has already held in favour of the appellant that procedure under Section 11B of the Act is not required to be followed an....