Pending appeal over an earlier refund rejection made a later identical rejection order non est and unsustainable.

A later order rejecting the same refund claim was passed while an appeal against the earlier rejection remained pending. The Tribunal held that a separate order on an identical claim, without notice of the earlier proceedings, was unwarranted and could not survive in view of the pending appeal. The subsequent impugned order was treated as non est and set aside, with the appeal allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the subsequent order rejecting the same refund claim was non est and liable to be set aside when an appeal against the earlier order on the same claim was already pending.

Analysis: The refund claim had already been rejected earlier and that rejection was under challenge before the Tribunal. During pendency of that appeal, another order rejecting the very same refund claim was passed. The Tribunal held that passing a separate order on the identical claim without taking note of the earlier proceedings was unwarranted, and that the later order could not stand in view of the pending appeal against the earlier order.

Conclusion: The subsequent impugned order was held to be non est and was set aside, resulting in allowance of the appeal.

---