2006 (1) TMI 337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. Heard ld. SDR. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. 2. The Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the refund claim of the respondent was allowed. 3. The contention of the Revenue is that in the impugned order Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002-CE., dated 1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of notification was claimed first time in the refund application that too without challenging the order of assessment. In these circumstances, in view of the above decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court, we find that impugned order is not sustainable hence set aside. The appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. (Dictated pronounced in open Court on 3-1-2006) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Central E .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X