Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (9) TMI 283

..... so many representations made by him did not fix the personal hearing and did not determine the amount of refund which is due to the appellant from the Department. HELD THAT:- The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 03.08.2012 has given cum-tax benefit to the appellant and the said benefit was to be determined after proper verification by the jurisdictional officer. Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) has also dropped the penalty by resorting to Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. After the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellant has been writing various letters to various Departmental Officer for proper verification as per the directions of the Commissioner (Appeals) but none of the officers bothered to comply with th .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... how-cause cum demand notice dated 19.04.2010 to demand and recover the service tax of ₹ 7,06,618/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Six Thousand Six Hundred and Eighteen only) along with interest and penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act. Additional Commissioner after following the due process vide Order-in-Original dated 29.11.2010 reduced the demand to ₹ 6,78,657/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Seventy Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty Seven only) along with equal penalty. After the receipt of the said order, appellant deposited the service tax of ₹ 5,69,517/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Seventeen only) along with interest of ₹ 1,30,922/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Two only .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... e appellant to appear before the Assistant Commissioner, Belgaum. Again on 17.12.2014, appellant visited the office of the Superintendent and submitted all the documents again and in spite of this, no communication was received for the hearing. Then ultimately, the appellant vide letter dated 28.02.2018 claimed the refund of service tax of ₹ 2,20,513/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Thousand Five Hundred and Thirteen only) paid by him in excess in the transaction. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dated 07.03.2018 rejected the said refund application as time-barred. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner and the Commissioner remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... any reminders to the Departmental Officers. The details of which has been placed on record. He also relied upon the Circular No. 802/35/2004-CX dated 08.12.2004 and also relied upon the following decisions: a. Hawkins Cookers Ltd. Vs. CCE, 2017 (6) GSTL-308 b. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, 2014 (311) E.L.T. 816 5. On the other hand the learned AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 03.08.2012 has given cum-tax benefit to the appellant and the said benefit was to be determined after proper verification by the jurisdictional officer. Further, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has also d .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

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

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||