TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1078
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s called, nobody is present on behalf of the respondent. The matter has been adjourned for more than 6 times in the past since the counsel for the respondent requested for time to produce evidence to show that the amount of refund had been shown as receivables in the financial records during the year 2006-07. Today when the matter was called, there is no such evidence produced nor the respondent i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llected. Subsequently, the assessment was finalized on 20th July 2007. During the final assessment, the SAD was held as not to be payable and consequentially the importer filed a refund claim for an amount of Rs. 42,45,654/-. Refund claim was rejected on the ground that assessee themselves had submitted that the cost of coal including SAD part had been absorbed in the cost of production. The asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt was shown as receivables in the year 2007. 6. It is quite clear that the certificate issued by the Cost Accountant is dt. 11/08/2008 whereas the OIO was passed on 11/06/2008. Therefore the certificate issued by the Cost Accountant was produced before the Commissioner(Appeals) only. Unfortunately the Commissioner (Appeals) did not notice the contradictions between the replay submitted by the im....