9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact that initially the refund claim was filed on 29.09.2008 and the same had been decided in favour of the appellant vide order dt. 16.03.2016 by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), therefore the appellant was not required to file the refund claim again. The understanding of the learned A.R. that the appellant was required to file the refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 194 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PER ASHOK JINDAL: The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order, wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed their appeal as time barred. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed a refund claim for the Cenvat credit lying on their account after export of services for the period of October-December 2007 on 29.09.2008. The said refund claim was partly rej ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quired to be sanctioned automatically but the Revenue, who did not follow the order of the learned Commissioner (appeals), therefore, they inadvertently filed the refund claim on 31.03.2017 and the same cannot be rejected as time barred. Therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the learned A.R. submits that after passing the order by the learned Commissioner (Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is against the provisions of law and both the authorities below are required to entertain the refund claim dt. 29.09.2008 and instead of considering the same, the adjudicating authority did not comply order dt. 16.03.2016 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and rejected the refund claim filed by the appellant inadvertently on 31.03.2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
