9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that in para 3.2 on page 5 of the Order No. A/1292-1293/14/CSTB-C-I dt. 23.7.2014, the figure i.e “Rs.1,44,76,395/-” stands corrected and be read as “Rs.34,86,722/-”. Time bar - Held that: - the order dt. 23.7.2014 appears to have been sent to the applicant but on going through the envelop enclosed by the applicant clearly shows that the order was not delivered to the applicant. It is also obs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the applicant reiterating the grounds of application submits that in para-3.2 on page 5 of the aforesaid order is mentioned whereas the appellant-assessee is contesting the service tax liability determined on the ground that they were entitled to CENVAT Credit of ₹ 1,44,76,395/- on the input services received by them . This figure of ₹ 1,44,76,395/- was wrongly mentioned as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st by the applicant vide their letter dt. 23.2.2016, a certified copy of the order was issued to the applicant thereafter the present application was filed on 9.5.2016 therefore it is well within the time from the date of receipt of the order. 3. Shri D. Nagvenkar Ld. Additional Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the present application was filed belatedly in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the applicant, we find that there is an apparent mistake in para 3.2 on page 5 of the order dt. 23.7.2014 that the figure of ₹ 1,44,76,395/- was wrongly mentioned instead of ₹ 34,86,722/- We therefore order that in para 3.2 on page 5 of the Order No. A/1292-1293/14/CSTB-C-I dt. 23.7.2014, the figure i.e Rs.1,44,76,395/- stands corrected and be read as Rs.34,86,722/- . Accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
