TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....length and perused the case record. 3. The ground of rejection of appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) is that the appeal was time barred as was field after the appeal period was over and after the condonable period of further 30 days available with the Commissioner (Appeals), it can't be entertained. However, in his order dated 10.05.2019 he made the following observation at para 7.5 "On perusal of the letter of the Assistant Commissioner, he has reported that impugned order dated 15.03.2018 should be considered as invalid on the ground that on the same issue the appellant had already field refund claim earlier and order was passed vide Order-in-Original dated 17.07.2017 against which no appeal was filed and on the same issue refund cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....app India Automotive System Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST, Pune-I reported in MANU/CM/0145/2018, but he was not empowered to entertain hearing of the appeal or decide on the merit of the said appeal. Therefore, the above reproduced paragraph is non est in the eyes of law. (ii) Judgment of a court would be fruitless if the ultimate hardship is not mitigated. It is therefore execution proceedings, contempt of court proceedings etc are in existence to give enforceability to the order/decree passed by a court of law. It is surprising that in the Tax Appellant Tribunal's order are not being dully honoured by the departmental officers by wrongly interpreting judicial decisions and the provisions of the statutes. Admittedly sub-Section 3 of Section 11B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uent to filing of the rest of documents or those dates were noted in para 2 erroneously. These aspect remain unanswered by the parties for which taking the adjudication Order-in-Original dated 15.03.2018, it can be presumed that refund application which is presently under challenge, was filed in 2016 in advance much before the alleged first refund application dated 19.04.2017 against which Order-in-Original dated 17.03.2017 was allegedly passed (not submitted by either parties). Therefore, without any correction being possible to the noting of dates in Order-in- Original dated 15.03.2018 the said order has to be accepted as the order of rejection of refund and principle of Res-Judicata would not be applicable to this for another strong reas....