9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther the order of Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi was right or wrong, was required to be adjudged by the higher appellate forum. The appellants plea that the Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi ought to have transferred the papers to Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat for further action instead of rejecting the same cannot be appreciated inasmuch as the Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi having passed the orders rejecting the refund claim, it was not open to the appellants to adjudge the correctness of the same. The proper course of action was to file the appeal against the above on the said ground. Having not done that, the findings of Commissioner (Appeals) that Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat was not authorised to reopen the proceedings and to reconsider the same when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finality. Instead of filing an appeal against order of Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi the appellant filed fresh refund claim before Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Sonepat. The Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat rejected the refund claim on the ground of limitation. 4. Being aggrieved with the order of the Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat, passed vide his order in original dated 4.12.09, the appellant preferred an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) observed that once the refund claim stand rejected by the Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi and the said order of the Asstt. Commissioner Delhi was never appealed against by the appellant, the Asstt. Commissioner Sonepat could not have decided the same for the second time. He howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igher appellate forum. As such, the same attained finality. The appellants instead of challenging the above order filed a fresh refund claim before the proper jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat who rejected the same on limitation. 7. I fully agree with the observations and findings arrived at by Commissioner (Appeals) that Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat was not having jurisdiction to reopen the proceedings concluded at the level of Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi. Whether the order of Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi was right or wrong, was required to be adjudged by the higher appellate forum. The appellants plea that the Asstt. Commissioner, Delhi ought to have transferred the papers to Asstt. Commissioner, Sonepat for further action instea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
