9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 922X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rification, it was expected that it would be completed within a reasonable period of two to three months. The Original Adjudicating Authority has not bothered to verify and comply with the Commissioner (Appeals) order dated 28 May 2018 for six years, which is entirely unacceptable. The concerned Original Adjudicating Authority is directed to comply with the directions in the order dated 28 May 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A-3 in 2014 seeking refunds. To date, the applications have not been processed. 3. The matter was adjourned so that the learned counsel for the Respondents could state the timeline within which these applications would be disposed of. At that time, this Court did not realise that the applications were made in 2014 and thought they had been pending for two or three years. 4. Today, learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust be noted that the officers are only trustees. If, on account of reasons attributable to them, the assesses are harassed, the public exchequer is forced to suffer and is drained, then the principles of accountability require that such officers compensate the assesses and the public exchequer. This is in addition to any departmental proceedings that would have to be initiated against such offici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adjudicating Authority to comply with the directions in the order dated 28 May 2018 within four weeks from today. We further direct the Commissioner, GST, to investigate the matter, determine the reasons for this inordinate delay, and fix responsibility on the concerned official/s. After assigning responsibility, the loss to the public exchequer must be recovered from the officer/s concerned. 10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
