2026 (3) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Respondent : Ms. Anandalakshmi Ganeshram, Authorized Representative ORDER PER: SHRI P. DINESHA: This Appeal is filed against Order--in--Appeal No.198/2016 dated 24.02.2016 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals--II), Chennai. 2. Heard Shri M.S. Nagaraja, Ld. Advocate for the Appellant and Ms. Anandalakshmi Ganeshram, Ld. Assistant Commissioner for the Respondent. 3. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Authority himself should have rectified the mistake since, admittedly, the excess of excise duty was paid at the insistence of the Revenue. However, the First Appellate Authority has, after setting aside the original order, directed the Adjudicating Authority to verify if the refund application filed by the Appellant was in time within the meaning of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. This has b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder passed by the First Appellate Authority. Thus, according to us, the only fact which survived undisputed, was that there was an error in the computation of duty. This also has been the direction in the impugned order by the Commissioner, but however, in the order there is no mention nor is there any acknowledgement about the application filed by the Assessee in 2009, wherein it was explained t....