9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s factory and the refund claim should have been filed with Commissionerate-III, who had the proper jurisdiction - Held that: - In the absence of any dispute about legality of the refund claim or about appellant’s entitlement to the same, the setting aside the order by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not justified - In case, the officer who sanctioned the refund claim was not having jurisdiction over ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, I find that the appellant who is an exporter of services, filed refund claim of accumulated Cenvat credit, in terms of the provisions of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, with their jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Commissionerate-I. The said refund claim was sanctioned by the Assistant Commissioner. 2. Revenue filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), on the ground that Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urisdiction, it was for the authorities to say so and not to decide their refund claim. He also submits that the refund has already been sanctioned to them and the division of the Commissionerate is only for ease of working and the department is one only and the refund actually sanctioned by the authorities cannot be rejected on the hyper technical grounds. 5.1 After hearing the Ld. DR, I find th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssionerate. In any case, the appellate authority set aside the order instead of remanding the matter to be re-adjudicated by the proper officer. 5.2 At this stage, I do not deem it fit to remand the matter to the proper Commissionerate/Officer as the refund has already been sanctioned and there is no dispute about merits of the refund. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order and restored the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
