2000 (4) TMI 130

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ld that the appellant claim is found to be correct. As a result of passing of the above order the appellant filed a refund application to the Asstt. Commr. for refund of duty of Rs. 6,80,307.50 which became due to them for the period 1-7-1975 to 31-3-1977. The refund claim was scrutinised by the proper officer and was ultimately sanctioned on 31-11-1992. The successor of the Asstt. Commr. issued a show cause notice dated 31-3-1993 proposing recovery of the amount which was more than Rs. 6 lacs on the ground that at the time of sanctioning of the refund claim undue enrichment aspect was not considered and second on the ground that Tribunal while passing the orders in respect of eligibility of the exemption Notification No. 161/75 did not con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f refund the same was valid and the adjudication order cannot be set aside on the said ground. 4. After considering the submissions made from both sides we find that the Tribunal in the case of Sree Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. has already taken a view relying upon the earlier orders of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E. v. Universal Radiators Ltd. Para 8 of the said judgment dealing with matter is being reproduced below for better appreciation : "8. However, the order passed under Section 35E(2) does not automatically result in recovering the erroneous refund. This order should be followed by a show cause notice under Section 11A, according to which the show cause notice should be issued within six months from the date of actual refund. ....