9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k a view that claim has to be calculated by treating the number of days available in November as the difference between the date of invoice and the last date of the month - Commissioner allowed full refund - Held that:- Refund should be limited to 3 days period as done by the original authority has no support from the statute. Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be rejected and is rejected. - Dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund he took a view that claim has to be calculated by treating the number of days available in November as the difference between the date of invoice and the last date of the month. Therefore claim was limited to 10% of the total amount claimed by treating the period as 3 days in the month of November in respect of invoice dated 27.11.2007. On an appeal filed by the assessee, the Commissioner (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 30.11.2007 were rendered only during 27.11.2007 to 30.11.2007. On this point, I do not find any justification in the argument put forth by the lower authority. Hence, I hold that the appellants are eligible for the entire refund in respect of the export undertaken vide invoice dated 30.11.2007. 2.1 I find myself in agreement with these observations and therefore the stand taken by the Reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y should have filed appeal as and when they received the Order-in-Appeal. It is not the case of the assessee that they did not receive the Order-in-Appeal. Under the circumstances, the Cross Objection filed after six years cannot be considered. 3.1 Another submission that the learned counsel for the assessee made was that the original adjudicating authority may limit the refund by applying a wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
