9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed this point at the time of filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, it transpires that the Commissioner (Appeals) has travelled beyond the scope of the original records in arriving at a conclusion that the appellant should not be eligible for refund benefit of ₹ 15,68,635/-. There is no material available on record to show that Revenue has contested the case of allowing the refund benefit by the original authority to the tune of ₹ 15,68,635/-. Thus, at this juncture, Revenue cannot contest such refund benefit allowed by the original authority - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/86602/2018 - A/88131/2018 - Dated:- 23-7-2018 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 31.10.2017, so far as it denied the refund benefit of ₹ 12,81,357/-, the appellant had preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal filed by the appellant was disposed of vide order dated 25.01.2018, wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the refund benefit of ₹ 12,81,327/-, holding that Banking and Finance services merit consideration as input service and non-submission of invoices is a procedural requirement, for which the substantive benefit cannot be denied. However, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has disallowed the refund benefit in respect of the claim amount of ₹ 15,68,635/-, on the ground that the disputed input services were used for personal consumption of the employ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ope or occasion on the part of appellant to agitate such matter before the Commissioner (Appeals). In fact, the appellant had never raised this point at the time of filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, it transpires that the Commissioner (Appeals) has travelled beyond the scope of the original records in arriving at a conclusion that the appellant should not be eligible for refund benefit of ₹ 15,68,635/-. Further, I also find that there is no material available on record to show that Revenue has contested the case of allowing the refund benefit by the original authority to the tune of ₹ 15,68,635/-. Thus, at this juncture, Revenue cannot contest such refund benefit allowed by the original authority. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
