9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igibility, mis-directed itself holding that the said issue attained finality being not raised by the Appellant. Needless to emphasize, no detailed reasoning was recorded on the merit of the claim for interest by the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) in the impugned Order even though the earlier order was set aside by the Tribunal and the matter was remanded to for reconsideration of the issues - it is pru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 19,38,750/- received by them pursuant to the Commissioner (Appeals) order dated 22.06.2007. It is the contention of the Ld. Advocate that initially the refund claim was filed by the Appellant in the year 1998 which was rejected by the Revenue and the litigation continued and ultimately it was allowed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) by its order dated 22.06.2007. Hence, the Appellants becam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal, which were disposed by the Final Order dated 27.05.2008; where under the Revenue s appeal was rejected and assessee s appeal was remanded to the adjudicating authority. She has further submitted that against the rejection of the Revenue s appeal, the matter is taken before the before the Hon ble Gujarat High Court and it is still pending. It is her contention that in the remand order this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant against the said Order, the issue of interest was not agitated before the Tribunal, hence, the same attained finality. However, from the grounds of appeal, it is seen that the Appellant had assailed the finding of the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) on rejection of the interest amount before this Tribunal. Thus, the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) in not examining the eligibility, mis-directed itsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
