TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cial) Shri Vishal Aggarwal, Shri K. Samodh Shri Tarik Ahmed, Advocates and Shri A.K. Sharma, VP for the Applicant(s) Shri Atul Handa, A.R. for the Respondent(s) ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal Applicant has filed this application under Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, for issuing necessary directions. 2. The facts of the case are that, the applicant filed refund claim of unutilised Cenvat credit lying in their Cenvat credit account before the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority issued a show cause notice for rejection of refund claim and after due examination, the refund claim was sanctioned to the applicant. The Revenue, aggrieved by the order of sanctioning the refund claim, challeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jection dated 06.12.2016 and additional written submission dated 20.12.2016 including therein various submissions. (iii) I find that the grounds submitted by the appellant Revenue are additional grounds/evidence viz. These grounds/evidences have not been submitted before the Adjudicating Authority. I find that as per Rule 5(3) of Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001, The Commissioner (Appeals) shall not take any evidence produced under sub-rule (1) unless the adjudicating authority..... has been allowed a reasonable opportunity (a) to examine the evidence or document..... produced by the appellant . I note that in CCE Vs Hindustan Lever Limited [2009 (247) ELT 689 (Tri-Del)], the Hon ble Tribunal has held that Rule 5(3) of Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Tribunal, therefore, in consequence of the impugned order, any exercise done by the adjudicating authority, as per directions in the impugned order, shall be futile, till disposal of the appeal. In that circumstance, we direct the adjudicating authority not to take any coercive action against the applicant, in the impugned proceedings till disposal of this appeal. The order is given Dasti. (Order dictated and pronounced in the court) 6. During the hearing, the appellant have referred to the suo moto notice for personal hearing issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Bahadurgarh and also produced the show cause notice dated 19.4.2017 issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak. Ld. AR clarified that the show cause no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
