1993 (11) TMI 66

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....earned counsel for the parties. There was a dispute between the appellants before us and the Excise Department as to whether the goods under dispute were liable under Tariff Item 15(1) or 15(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as amended. 2. The Supreme Court upheld the submission of the appellant that the appellant is liable to pay excise duty under Item 15(1) and repelled t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....us directing the Revenue authorities to decide the application for refund. The High Court directed the authorities to consider the application of the appellants on merits for refund. At the same time, the High Court directed "the petitioners are directed to get the bank guarantees extended till the final disposal of the claim for refund." It is against the afore- said directions of the High Court ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n view of the orders of the High Court encashed the bank guarantees. We find behaviour of the excise department highly improper. Bank guarantees are furnished to secure interest of the parties till determination of matters pending before the court. No bank guarantees can be encashed till the decision of the court. This Court having once decided the appeal on merits the bank guarantees of their own....