ORDER
Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)
1. After hearing Shri Arun Chopra, Ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his impugned order has held that the refund claim of Rs. 1,09,026/- should be given to the respondent by way of cash, if the Asst. Commissioner is satisfied that the respondent are not in a position to utilise the credit in RG 23 Pt. II. While ordering so he has taken into consideration the Tribunal’s decision in the case of C.C.E. v. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. reported in 2002 (139) E.L.T. 125 (Tri.-Kolkata).
2. The said amount was originally paid by the respondents by debiting RG 23 Pt. II. However, when the dispute was finally settled, they claimed the refund in PLA inasmuch as by that time they had moved out of the Modvat credit scheme and were availing the benefit of small scale exemption notification. Commissioner (Appeals) observed that if it is so the refund should be given to the respondents in cash.
3. I find no infirmity in the above view of the Commissioner (Appeals). If the respondents is not able to utilise the credit, the very basis of the refund is defeated, in which case the amount is to be given to him in cash.
4. In view of the foregoing, I do not find any merits in the Revenue’s appeal and reject the same.