9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 302X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the appellant, deficiency removed by the appellant on 14.07.2018 - HELD THAT:- There is no denial on part of the appellant that the application filed by him under section 11B of Central Excise Act for claiming the refund was immediately returned along with the deficiency memo. The appellant could remove that deficiency not before 14.07.2018. The said application was complete and proper only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mistake. Said refund was sanctioned by the Original Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 7.1.2019. However, no interest of delayed refund was sanctioned. Resultantly an appeal was preferred before learned Commissioner (Appeals) who vide order dated 29.3.2019 directed the Original Adjudicating Authority to sanction the interest to the appellant. In compliance thereof, the interest of ₹ 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tory provision has not been complied with. Therefore, order under challenge is prayed to be set aside and appeal prayed to be allowed. 4. Per contra, it is submitted on behalf of the department that though the application for refund was filed on 10.11.2017 but the same was incomplete due to which deficiency memo was issued to the appellant. The said deficiency could finally be removed by the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d any infirmity in the order under challenge where Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the decision of Tribunal Mumbai in the case of State Bank of India vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai I reported in [2014 (34) STR 579 (Tri-Mum)]. Resultantly, the order under challenge is hereby upheld and appeal is hereby dismissed. (Pronounced in the open Court on 06-08-2021 ) - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
