TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 717
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re the Commissioner (Appeals) against the order of rejection passed by the refund sanctioning authority who erroneously gave a finding that the same is one of rebate, supposed to be Governed under Notification No. 41/2012-ST dated 29.06.2012 in which event the refund application, filed in 2014 should have been filed within one year from the date of export made in 2012. He submits that the service provider had realised the Service Tax paid on postal parcel charges which were not payable but that matter was not considered by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 3. In justification of the grounds of delay, he submitted death certificate of the Managing Partner who died just three months before the Order-in-Original was passed on 30.06.2014 in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no irregularity can be attributed to his order. Secondly, the issue in this appeal being one of refund of rebate, CESTAT has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal in view of operation of Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 86 amended provisions vis. a. vis Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944. 5. In submitting judicial decision reported in Singh Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur - [2008 (221) ELT 163 (SC)] of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court reported in 2012-TIOL-278-HC-MUM-CX in the case of M/s. Raj Chemicals vs. Union of India & Ors. he argued that the issue has been set at rest and it has been recognised that after 90 days Commissioner (Appeals) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aper Products Ltd. except that judicial proprietary demands respect for order passed by Co-ordinate Benches has become an accepted legal principle by virtue of consistent decisions of the High Courts and Supreme Court, one of which was reported in 2017 (349) ELT 203 (S.C.) and another was passed recently on 13.09.2021 in the case of UP Jal Vidyut Nigam Vs. Balbir Singh. Rule of precedent prevailing in India indicates that in the case of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, "the new shall prevail over the old". This being the legal position propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in following the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in the MP Steel Corporation judgment passed on dated 23.04.2015 that the spirit of the princ....