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 →

Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow Versus M/s I.T.I. Limited

2017 (9) TMI 765 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Refund of excess duty paid - Held that: - the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has held that once the provisional assessment got finalized on the basis of requisite documents already submitted by the respondent, the refund claim cannot be denied for want o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r, Member (Technical) Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent (AR), for Appellant Shri S. P. Ojha, Consultant for Respondent ORDER The present appeal is filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 185 to 188-CE/LKO/2014 dated 10/10/2014 passed by Com .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issioner to allow provisional assessment under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the ground of non-finalization of rate contract prices for supply to the Department of Telecommunication (DOT). Subsequently the assessments were finalized fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stated Financial Years in excess of duty due from the respondent. The respondent submitted application for refund of excess duty paid by them as held by Original Authority during the finalization of assessments. The respondents were issue with lette .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l No. R/52, 04, 03, 02/RBL/2013 respectively dated 18/03/2013, 11/06/2013, 11/06/2013 & 11/06/2013. Aggrieved by the said orders Revenue preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). The said appeals were decided through impugned Order-in-Appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d claim cannot be denied. The above issue has already been settled in the Order-in-Appeal No. 303-CE/LKO/2011 dated 29/06/2012 and Order-in-Appeal No. 379-381-CE/LKO/2011 dated 27/08/2012, there is no need to discuss again. He has further held that t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by Revenue as follows:- (A) The respondent had not submitted the documents as required in support of their refund claim. (B) The Department has not accepted Order-in-Appeal No. 379-381-CE/LKO/2011 dated 27/08/2012. (C) The respondents have failed to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

led appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 379-381-CE/LKO/2011 dated 27/08/2012 which was assigned Appeal No. E/3866/2012-EX[D]} and the same was decided through Final Order No. 70608/2017 dated 29/06/2017, wherein this Tribunal has dismissed the appeal .....

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