CCE Vs. KAUSHAL STEEL ROLLING MILLS,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these appeals, the Revenue has made challenge to the impugned order -in -appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the order -in -original and allowed the refund of the duty amount to the respondents.

(2.) The facts are not much in dispute. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of bars and dispute regarding the classification and rate of duty payable in respect thereof arose between the parties. During that dispute, the respondents deposited the duty at a higher rate, as demanded by the Department under protest. The Classification issue ultimately was decided in their favour by the Tribunal in December, 1990. But that order of the Tribunal was challenged by the Department before the Apex Court and the Apex court decided the matter in the year 1997.

(3.) The plea taken up by the Department is that the refund claims should have been filed within a period of six months from the date of passing of the Tribunal's order. Having not so done, the adjudicating authority dismissed their claims on the ground of limitation, but that order has been reversed by the Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned order by holding that since the duty was paid under protest which was never vacated by the Department by passing any order, and that after the passing of the order by the apex Court, the Department was duty bound to refund the excess differential duty charged from the respondents after the clearance of the goods.