TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 621
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellants are engaged in providing consulting engineering service. They filed refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for the unutilized credit. Show cause notice was issued proposing to reject the refund claim on the following four grounds:- The assessee has not filed declaration with Deputy / Assistant Commissioner before e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmitted the details of the relevant claims which is as under:- S. No. Period of claim Amount claimed as refund 1. July 2014 to Sep. 2014 Rs.10,76,487/- 2. Jan. 2015 to March 2015 Rs.8,56,326/- 3.1 He submitted that the adjudicating authority had considered all the grounds in the adjudication order and held that the assessee is not required to fulfill the condition of filing decla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er (Appeals) has taken up all these grounds and has erroneously held against the appellant even though there is no appeal filed by the department. 3.2 With regard to the ground for rejection that the premises is not registered and therefore credit is not eligible, which is the sole ground on which the adjudicating authority has rejected the refund claim, the ld. counsel submitted that the said is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grounds and held against the appellant which is not proper. The department having not filed any appeal against the Order-in-Original, I find force in the contention of the ld. counsel. Thus, the rejection of refund as held by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order on the three grounds is incorrect and requires to be set aside, for the reason that the department has not appealed against t....