TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on filed before him. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have considered all submissions before him and given his decision on acceptance or rejection grounds raised before him - the impugned order set aside and matter remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to consideration of said submissions under said para-9 and any other submission and give a reasoned order - appeal allowed by way of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from 2009-10 to 2013-14 (up to January, 2014). Covering the said period, the demand under Sub-rule 3 of Rule 6 was raised against the appellant which was challenged before the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad. Hon ble Allahabad has quashed the said show cause notice dated 25.04.2014 on 18.08.2015. The appellant claimed refund of said amount which was debited by appellant on their own account. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,14,09,360/- under said Rule 6 (3) was issued to them which was dropped by the Commissioner and subsequently, the amount debited by the appellant was refunded by the Assistant Commissioner vide Order dated 18.08.2017. He further contended that revenue cannot adopt different standers for different periods. 4. Heard the learned A.R. for revenue, who has supported the impugned Order-in-Appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
