https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443634 The case involved a dispute over the rejection of a refund claim by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to discrepancies in the remitter's name on FIRCs and differences in Cenvat credit. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously upheld the rejection without considering previous acceptances by the Ld. Joint Commissioner. The court remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to reevaluate the remaining contested issues within two months to ensure a fair consideration of all relevant matters. en-us Tue, 26 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Sep 2023 08:47:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443634 The case involved a dispute over the rejection of a refund claim by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to discrepancies in the remitter's name on FIRCs and differences in Cenvat credit. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously upheld the rejection without considering previous acceptances by the Ld. Joint Commissioner. The court remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) to reevaluate the remaining contested issues within two months to ensure a fair consideration of all relevant matters. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 26 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443634