2017 (3) TMI 708

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , 07.03.2008, 07.03.2008 and 27.05.2008. Later on in the impugned proceedings the date of receipt has been changed which is not permissible as in the earlier round of litigation, the Revenue itself admitted the date of communication of adjudication order as mentioned in the earlier round of litigation in EA-2 taken to be correct. If the said dates are taken to be correct, then all the review order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the date of receipt of the adjudication order. The appellant raised the said issue before the Commissioner (Appeals) who did not consider the same. In the earlier proceedings, it was held that the review has been done within three months of the receipt of the adjudication order, therefore, the review was within time and the appellant is not entitled for refund claim. Aggrieved with the said ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ides and considered the submissions. 6. I have gone through the records placed before me and find that in the earlier round of litigation wherein the details as follows:- DATE OF: OIO No. Appeal No. date Communication As per EA-2 Receipt as per OIA Dt. 11.09.2014 Order in Review Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... /2007 28.02.2008 760/2008 Dt.23.7.08 07.03.2008 03.04.2008 30.06.2008 23.7.2008 (vi) 09/2008-09 27.05.2008 911/2008 Dt.19.9.08 27.05.2008 10.06.2008 9.9.2008 19.9.2008 7. On going through the chart, I find that in the ear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X