2017 (12) TMI 945

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er: S.S GARG The present appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the impugned order dated 26.02.2015 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee. 2. The Revenue aggrieved by the remand order passed by the Commissioner (A) directing the original authority to re-examine the rejection of Rs. 20,00,000/- and pass appropriate speaking....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2003. The Respondents are now seeking the refund of the said total amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- as the demand is dropped by the Commissioner in denovo proceeding consequent to Final Order No.852-868/2008 dated 24.06.2008 of CESTAT, Bangalore. 4. After following the due process, the original authority rejected the refund of Rs. 20,00,000/- which is in dispute in this appeal by holding the said amo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecide the Revenue appeal on the basis of material on record. The Learned AR submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same is passed without considering the material facts. He further submitted that it is only the competent Asst. Commissioner who can sanction the refund claim before the Commissionerate Bangalore-I whereas the show cause notice was issued by Bangalore-I, II....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lore-I whereas the SCNs had been issued by Bangalore-I, II and III Commissionerates. It is the observation of the original authority that she did not have jurisdiction for sanctioning the said claim for Rs. 20,00,000/-. The original authority has rejected the claim in this regard opining that the claim has to be filed separately with the concerned jurisdictional divisional officer or concerned Com....