Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Vardhman Fabrics Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Bhopal

2016 (10) TMI 766 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Restoration of withdrawn refund claim - withdrawal of claim on the pressure of jurisdictional Superintendent - services used for export - N/N.41/2007- ST - Held that: - It is clear that refund claim was originally filed to the extent of ₹ 2,14, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

adjudicate the full claim, may be true but cannot be appreciated inasmuch as the appellants never revised their claim subsequently. As such, the original adjudicating authority admittedly could not have adjudicated the withdrawal claim. He has consi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he notification can be examined only in respect of the claim so filed by the assessee. - Appeal disposed off - decided against appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. 1116 of 2010- (SM) - FO/53662/2016-(SM) - Dated:- 9-9-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Me .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n terms of notification No. 41/2007- ST to the extent of ₹ 2,14,156/-. The said refund application was filed on 14.9.2009. 2.Thereafter, vide letter dated 22.12.2009 addressed by the appellant to their jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Serv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 94,348/- and was sanctioned. 4. Being aggrieved with the fact that withdrawn amount was not adjudicated by the original adjudicating authority, they filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants contention was that withdrawal of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ioner (Appeals) did not agree with the above contention of the appellant and accordingly rejected the appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 6. After carefully considering the submissions made by both the sides and after examining relevant letter dated 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version