2007 (2) TMI 224

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-CII of 2006. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 310 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. 2. The Civil Misc. Application is allowed. C.E.A. No. 56 of 2006 3. The Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short 'the Act') claiming that substantial questions of law would emerge out of order dated 3-8-2004 passed by the Cus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in law by setting aside the Order-in-Appeal No.4/CE/Appl/Jal/2004 dated 28-1-2004 of Commissioner (Appeals) remanding back the case to the Adjudicating Authority with the directions for deciding the refund claim of the party after awaiting the order of the Commissioner on representation made by them against the order of determination of Annual Capacity of Production DQ (ACP), when it is evident t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xamination. 5. Learned Counsel for the Revenue submitted that the respondent having not challenged the order of determination of capacity, was not entitled to seek relief with reference thereto in the proceedings for refund of the excess amount on account of excise duty paid. The exercise of powers under the circumstances by the Tribunal was not in conformity with the Act. On the other hand, lear....