9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1098X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one ORDER PER: ANIL CHOUDHARY: The revenue have filed the present application for rectification of mistake in the final order dated 9/9/2011. The Ground for rectification is that the respondent-assessee had filed claim of refund under Notification No. 5/2006-ST and the said refund claim was rejected vide the Order-in-Original and the same was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). This Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it Rules, 2004. Whereas this Tribunal in final order had discussed the whole issue in terms of Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Claim of refund under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was not the subject matter either in the show-cause notice as well as in the Order-in-Original. 2. On perusal of the Order-in-Original I find that in their reply to the deficiency memo the assessee had raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals) have considered the claim of the assessee under both Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules read with Notification No. 5/2006 CE and also under Notification No. 41/2007-ST. 4. Having considered the contentions of the Revenue I find that it is a point of law whether the claim was allowable under Rule 41/2007 or under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 5/2006-CE. A point ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
