TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal is a Appellate Authority and it has been approached because of the rejection of the petitioner's plea claiming the refund or credit of cenvat credit. The order passed on the representation / application of the petitioner and in terms of the Division Bench direction dated 27th January, 2014 in Writ Petition No.621 of 2014 is nothing but a speaking order on the Refund Application - It is appealable to Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, who shall now allow the petitioner to proceed with the appeal filed before it in accordance with law. In the event the appeal is not existing on its file, the petitioner may be permitted to file a fresh appeal challenging the communication / order dated 7th March, 2014 by treating it as a or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Madras High Court had been filed by M/s. CNIL and that is pending. In the light of the order passed by this Court, a consolidated return of service tax liability was filed and a sum of ₹ 79,92,56,619/- being the liability of service tax dues of M/s. CNIL from October, 2010 to March, 2012 was paid. 3. Later on, the petitioner was advised that though this Court has sanctioned the scheme of merger, the Madras High Court is yet to sanction it. Therefore, the petitioner made an application and details of the same are disclosed in the writ petition. The petitioner then sought virtual refund of the said amount of ₹ 79,92,56,619/- or relief in the form of credit of their cenvat credit amount to this extent. A representation was m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N. An appeal was indeed filed before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Tribunal but on 7th August, 2014, it passed order Annexure-N holding the same is not maintainable. What is termed by the Tribunal in its order about Annexure-A is that it is a communication and not a order under the Act. Therefore, his writ petition is maintainable. 7. We have considered these contentions and what we find is that once this Court has directed that the representation made by the petitioner to the authorities praying for refund or credit in the cenvat credit account be considered and a speaking order be passed thereon after hearing the petitioner, then, the Tribunal has taken a hyper technical view. Annexure-A is nothing but an order passed by the auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
