Hawco Petrofer LLP Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Chandigarh)
In the case abovementioned it was held by CESTAT Chandigarh that held that without challenging the refund order, the refund cannot be recovered.
Assessee was working under Notification No.56/2002-CE dated 14.11.2002 which provides for exemption from the duty of excise to specified goods cleared from industrial units in the State of Jammu & Kashmir to the extent of duty paid in cash by way of a refund mechanism, for a period of ten years from the date of publication of the notification or from the date of commencement of commercial production, whichever is later. During the scrutiny of ER-1 Returns, it was found that the assessee had availed self-credit of the duty paid by it and not taken into account discount paid at the end of the financial year while paying the duty. Department found that assessee had violated the conditions of the Notification and hence they have claimed refund of an excess amount which was sanctioned. However, subsequently a show cause notice was issued to them proposing to recover the said amount on the grounds that they have availed excess refund. The demand was confirmed along with interest and penalty against the appellant and the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order of the Adjudicating Authority.
