GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (6) TMI 1056 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (6) TMI 1056 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Eligibility of refund - recovery proceedings - Held that:- The admitted fact is that the Original Authority found that the refund is correctly eligible to the appellant. However, he appropriated the amount against the confirmed demands without due notice for recovery to the appellant. It is a fact that all the confirmed demands were taken up on appeal and were pending with higher appellate Forum with a request for stay of recovery. Before any decision .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ility of Section 11. It was held that sums due to Government become arrears only after finality is reached on such demand. The Appellate Authority also confirmed such appropriation without examining the legality of action of recovery proceedings. However, as shown now by the appellant, none of the confirmed demands survive as on date. This being not disputed by Revenue also. In any case, in view of non-existence of any confirmed demand as on date, the appellant is rightly eligible for full payme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

facts relevant to the appeal are that the appellants filed a claim for refund of ₹ 33,42,525/- with the jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner. The said claim was processed and sanctioned by the Original Authority vide his order dated 9.7.2014. The Original Authority after sanctioning the refund claim in full ordered the appropriation of the said amount against the confirmed demands of duty in terms of three orders passed by the Original Authority. 3. On appeal, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

existing as they were either set aside or sent for fresh adjudication. Elaborating further, on the status of each confirmed demand, ld. Counsel stated that the order-in-original no.126 dated 31.01.2013 and order-in-appeal dated 24.12.2013, on such original order was set aside by the Tribunal vide Final Order No.53527-53529 of 2015 dated 20.11.2015 ; order-in-original no.129 dated 31.01.2013; order-in-appeal dated 24.12.2013 on such original order was set aside by the Tribunal vide Final Orders .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

refund in full as already decided by the Original Authority. 5. Ld. AR submitted that the appellant did not produce any stay order or order of higher authority before the Original Authority or Appellate Authority and hence, the order of appropriation was passed. 6. Heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. 7. The admitted fact is that the Original Authority found that the refund is correctly eligible to the appellant. However, he appropriated the amount against the confirmed demands .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version