9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... up to the level of Commissioner (A) and one round before this Tribunal has to be reproduced and finally it had to be submitted that if the Tribunal was aware of the acceptance of the Order-in-Appeal by Revenue decision would have been different itself and would know their own error apparent from the order or record in this case. It cannot be a mistake on the part of the Tribunal having not been aware of acceptance of Order-in-Appeal, but in fact, the mistake on the part of the Revenue to have accepted the order-in-original without thinking of the consequences. - application for rectification rejected. - Appeal No. ST/157/11 - - - Dated:- 14-12-2012 - Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, J. For the Appellant: Shri Shiv Kumar (AR) For the Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... WZB, Ahmedbad, against Order-in-Appeal No.439/2010 dated 22/11/2010 stating that the Commissioner (A) should have herself called for the records, examined the evidences and passed Order on merits after following the principles of natural justice, instead of straight away setting aside the impugned order on the grounds of violation of the principles of natural justice. The department in its appeal prayed before this Hon ble CESTAT to remand back the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) or original refund processing authority with directions to decide the matter on merits after following the principles of natural justice so that the refund claim can be decided on merits. 5. In the meantime, before the departmental appeal could be decided by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the department. 7. The Honourable CESTAT, WZB, Ahmedabad vide Final Order No. A/1114/WZB/AHD/2012 dated 20/07/2012 has dismissed the departmental appeal as in-fructuous. This decision has been taken on the plea of counsel of the respondent assessee that lower authority has already sanctioned refund consequent upon passing of impugned order (Order-in-Appeal No.439/2010). The Honourable CESTAT has observed in para 3 as follows:- 3. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the order of the learned Commissioner has already been implemented and refund has already been sanctioned and therefore, the appeal has to be dismissed as in-fructuous. I find that this is so, if Revenue is aggrieved with the decision of the adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
