2026 (4) TMI 1073

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llants on the ground that Appellants himself classified Zarda Scented Tobacco as chewing tobacco. The Adjudicating Authority vide Order dated 16.03.2017 confirmed the demand along with equal penalty. On an appeal filed by the Appellant, this Bench Vide Final Order No.72313-72317/2018 dated 25.09.2018 allowed the appeal. Accordingly, the Appellants filed a refund claim for the duty of Rs.5,01,96,143/- paid by them. The Assistant Commissioner vide the impugned order dated 14.11.2018 sanctioned refund of Rs.4,99,30,330/- and rejected refund of Rs.2,65,813/-. The Appellants preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds that the impugned order sanctioned refund but interest was not paid; the Appellants are entitled....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri Santosh Kumar, Authorized Representative appearing on behalf of the Appellant-Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal. 3. Dr. Seema Jain, Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent submits that: - • The declaration filed by the Respondent manufacturer was under Rule 6(1) of the Chewing Tobacco Packing Rules; the determination of duty is beyond the scope of capacity determination order as held by the Tribunal in the case of Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. V/s CCE & ST, Ghaziabad 2017 (352) E. L.T. 232. • The amount deposited by the Respondent under protest was not towards payment of duty as the amount was not paid in compliance of capacity determination under Rule 7 and Rule 9 of the Chewing Tobacco Capacity ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s gone into an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the Final Order passed by this Bench on 25.09.2018 in respect of the classification of goods manufactured by the Respondent. 6. It has been brought to our notice by the Learned Counsel of the Respondent that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has since dismissed the appeal filed by the Department and as such the issue of classification is no longer res integra. To that extent we find that there is no force in the grounds of the appeal filed by the Appellant. On going through the records of the case, it appears, that the Respondent have never accepted the classification arrived at by the Revenue and have been agitating the same. Under the circumstances the amount was deposited by them ....