TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the said CESTAT Final Order, there is nothing forthcoming on record that the said Order has been stayed or otherwise the Department Appeal allowed. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.: E/40604/2013 - Final Order No. 40491/2019 - Dated:- 14-3-2019 - Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) And Shri P. Dinesha, Member (Judicial) Shri. M. Ja ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were issued with an Order-in-Original No. 19/2009 dated 11.08.2009 for denial of CENVAT Credit to the tune of ₹ 50,38,379/- on foreign agents commission and hence, this amount was deducted from the total credit availed by the appellants during October 2008; (iii) After deducting and treating the claims in respect of four exports as time-barred, the adjudicating authority sanct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by allowing the impugned Credit of ₹ 50,38,379/- on the basis of CESTAT Final Order Nos. 73 and 74/2011 dated 13.01.2011 passed against Order-in-Original No. 19/2009 dated 11.08.2009. The Department had filed an appeal against the said CESTAT Final Order before the Hon ble High Court. Hence, for these reasons also, the impugned Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is incorrect. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imed by the appellants with another demand made against the appellant vide Order-in-Original No. 19/2009 dated 11.08.2009 passed by the Commissioner. I find that the aforesaid Order-in-Original was sub judice before the Hon ble CESTAT at the time of passing of the impugned refund order and such being the situation, the adjudicating authority cannot adjust the refund against the demand which had no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
