9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst a demand was not required to be so charged and adjustable - whether the appellant was entitled to refund? - Held that: - It is strange to notice that learned Commissioner (Appeals), who granted refund on proper adjudication of the matter by his order dated 21.05.2012, without that order being appealed by the department, was reviewed by him for the purpose of ordering recovery of the refund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is brought to the notice that the right to refund arose from the Order-in-Appeal No. 26/2012-CEX .RF., dated 21.05.2012 in Appeal No.118/2011.CE.RF disposed on 21.05.2012 by learned Commissioner (Appeals), who on consideration of relevant fact and evidence held that interest of ₹ 2,80,257/- having been earlier charged and appropriated against a demand was not required to be so charged and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sense as to how the same authority who passed an order shall change his mind in a subsequent proceeding to review his previous order and reverse the same contrary to the judicial discipline and to the detriment rule of consistency. In absence of appeal by Revenue, the order dated 21.05.2012, reached to finality. 4. The appellant today is in appeal against the order dated 18.06.2013 stated abo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
