TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1414
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Nagaraj Naik, Deputy Commissioner(AR) for the Respondent ORDER [Order Per Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] The above three appeals are filed against the order passed by Commissioner(Appeals) who upheld the rejection of refund claim passed by original authority. The issue involved in all the appeals being the same, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. 2. The appellant is private....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../12/2012 1,10,331 4. 01/01/2013 to 31/03/2013 1,02,450 Total 3,38,988 3. The refund claim was rejected by the original authority on the ground that the documents were not proper and also that the appellant had not taken registration. In appeal, the Commissioner(Appeals) observed that the appellant has furnished necessary documents. However he upheld the rejection of refund claims fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case of CST Vs. Tavan Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. [2016(43) STR 57 (Kar.)]. That the appellant was granted refund for the period prior to taking registration vide Order-in-original No.19/2014 dt. 27/06/2014 by the Mumbai Division of the Department. 5. The learned AR Shri Nagaraj Naik reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 6. I have heard the submissions made before me. The issue wh....