9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 953X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e only one consolidated claim per month for refund in terms of N/N. 102/2007 - Held that: - since the notification itself does not provide for such a condition that only one refund claim is to be filed within a month, refund is allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - C/CROSS/20067/2017, C/20181/2016-DB, C/COD/20068/2017, C/20181/2016-DB, C/20181/2016-DB - 23131 / 2017 - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m. The original authority rejected said refunds. When the issue was carried before the Commissioner(Appeals), vide the impugned order, the refund was allowed. Aggrieved by the decisions, Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. The respondent filed Cross-objections after a delay of 280 days and also filed an application for condonation of delay of such delay in filing such cross-objections. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to which the importers are required to file only one consolidated claim per month for refund in terms of Notification No.102/2007. The learned Commissioner(Appeals) has taken the view that, since the notification itself does not provide for such a condition that only one refund claim is to be filed within a month, she has allowed. After perusal of records, we find no infirmity in the said order wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
