2024 (11) TMI 129

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the periods October 2008 to March 2009 and April 2009 to September 2009, respectively under Notification No.5/2006-CE(NT) dated 14.03.2006. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent has rejected the refund applications filed by the appellant vide Order-in-Original No. 352/2010 dated 26.07.2010 and Order-in-Original No. 117/2011 dated 28.02.2011. Aggrieved by the orders of the adjudicating authority the appellant filed appeals and Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order No. 149/2011 dated 31.05.2012 and Order No. 150/2012 dated 31.05.2012 upheld the order of the Adjudicating Authority. Aggrieved by the Commissioner (Appeals) order appellant filed appeals before Hon'ble CESTAT, Bangalore and the Tribunal vide Final Order Nos. 21813-2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e the issue relating to FIRC in the light of our observations in the Interim Order No. 79 to 152/2014 dated 18.09.2014 in Apotex Research (P) Ltd. and others." 3. The adjudicating authority based on the CESTAT's Final Order Nos. 21813-21814/2014 dated 24.09.2014 vide Orders-in-Original No. 05(R)/2015 and 04(R)/2015 both dated 14.09.2015, sanctioned the refund amount in full. The above refund orders were reviewed by Committee of Commissioners and appeals were filed before Commissioner (Appeals), who remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority vide Orders-in-Appeal No. 177 & 178/2019 dated 05.11.2019 with a direction to the Original Adjudicating Authority to follow the Hon'ble Supreme Court directions. The appellants have filed Appeal ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aka vide CEA No. 24 & 25/2016. The Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 20.06.2018 and 13.06.2018 dismissed the appeals, since there is no substantial question of law involved in the remand order of the Tribunal. Against the order of the Hon'ble High Court, the respondent filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide SLP Nos. 5062 & 5093/2019. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 08.03.2019 held that:- "We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. However, we clarify that the remand proceedings before the adjudicating authority must proceed on their own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by any observation made in the impugned judgments as well as the remand order passed by the Tribunal. All questi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n its own merit in accordance with law. All contentions available to both sides in the proceedings pending are to be pursued between the parties with regard to subject matter shall be decided on its own merit. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed of accordingly. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of". 8. We find that the appellant has filed two Appeals ST/20578 and 20586/2021 against the Order-in-Appeals remanding the matter to the original authority by the Commissioner (Appeals). Against this remand order, the adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claims vide Orders-in-Original No.02 and 03 dated 15.05.2020 and on appeal by the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the....