9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in, Chartered Accountant for the appellant. Shri Pradeep Gupta, Authorised Representative for the respondent. ORDER All these three appeals relate to rejection of refund claim for unutilised cenvat credit under Rule 5 of CCR read with Notification No.27/2012-CE (NT). The refund claims were filed prior to 30.07.2017, which were rejected by the Adjudicating Authority vide different orders-in-ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reafter, again filed the refund claims before the Adjudicating Authority, which were again rejected. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide common impugned order dated 29.02.2019, held that once the appeals were rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals), though the appellant may be entitled to take re-credit under the repealed provisions of Notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he year 2018 as the appellant chose not to file any further appeal before the higher forum. I further hold that the subordinate legislation is effective or in force till the date of Parent Act only. As the Parent Act in this case is repealed w.e.f. 1.7.2017, when the CGST provisions, came into force. Accordingly, the appellant have erred in law taking re-credit of the rejected refund amount in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
