9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... detriment of the assessee - Since the order does not say what the procedural irregularities were and since the second respondent has not concluded as to how such irregularities have impacted the parties concerned, it is certain that the conclusions therein cannot obtain favor of law. The second respondent is directed to re-consider the Revision Application of the first respondent, which led to Exhibit P3, after affording an opportunity of being heard to both the petitioner - petition disposed off. - W.P.(C)No.6670 of 2008 R - - - Dated:- 12-7-2018 - Mr. Devan Ramachandran, J. For The Petitioner: SRI.P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST.SOLICITOR, SRI.P. GOPINATH MENON, SC,CEN.BOARD OF EX, SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, SC, CEN.BOARD OF EXCIS AND SRI.P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent. 3. Even though the impugned order appears to have gone into the issues raised by the parties quite in extenso, I am of the view that it would not be necessary for me at this stage to consider them on their merits for a very singular reason as I will presently state. 4. As is clear from Exhibit P3, the Revisional Authority has allowed the Revision Application filed by the first respondent finding that the benefit of rebate or draw back or cenvat credit or cash refund of CVD suffered by it, could have been availed in case 'the right procedure had been followed'. It further concludes that in such circumstances, the Government 'feels that procedural irregularities should not have come in the way of neutralising the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st respondent, taking note of the various relevant factors involved and to conclude as to what are the procedural irregularities and how it has impeded the first respondent from availing the benefits of rebate/ draw back/cenvat credit/cash refund of CVD and thereafter pass consequential orders. 7. I clarify that I have not considered the merits of the other contents of Exhibit P3 and that I am proceeding to quash the same only because of the reason that I have afore recorded, so as to pave way for a fresh consideration. It is, therefore, needless to say that I have not considered the merits of the contentions of the parties in this writ petition but that I leave it open for them to raise it appropriately before the second respondent when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
