2016 (9) TMI 1412

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l Gupta and Hrishikesh, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Superintendent (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (T)]. - The present appeal is preferred against Order-in-Appeal No. 194-CE/LKO/2007, dated 31-12-2007 passed by Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturer of Petrole....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rounds. One is that the refund is hit by time-bar; and another is proper original documents like invoices (under Rule 11 & PLA) were not submitted. 3. The appellant preferred appeal before ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who decided the appeal through Order-in-Appeal No. 463/2005-C.E., dated 11-11-2005. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held that the date of filing of refund claim was 8-7-2003 an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the invoices. The appellant preferred an appeal before ld. Commissioner (Appeals) which is decided through Order-in-Appeal No. 194-CE/LKO/2007, dated 31-12-2007, wherein the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has held that since the original copies of invoice were not produced by the appellant, the rejection of refund by original Authority is in Order. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Appeal dated 31-12-....