2026 (4) TMI 1057

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stantive reliefs:- "Prayers in Writ Petition No. 3526 of 2024 a. To issue a writ of Certiorari or any other writ or order or direction of appropriate nature to quash the Order. in-Appeal dated 18.01.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 1 whereby the said Respondent has arbitrarily rejected the appeal filed by the Petitioner without considering endorsement certificates filed by the Petitioner for being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, and violative of Article 14 and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and b. To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order or direction of appropriate nature directing the Respondent No. 1 to consider and accept the endorsement certificates....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aid by the Respondents." 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. By the impugned order, the petitioner's claim for refund has been rejected on the premise as set out in the following paragraphs:- "From the above, it is crystal clear that in respect of supplies to a Special Economic Zone or a Specific Economic Zone developer, the application for refund shall be filed by the supplier of goods after such goods have been admitted in full in the Special Economic Zone for authorized operations, as endorsed by the specified officer of the zone on the export documents. Further from the RFD-06 ZH2711220007969 dated 01.11.2022 submitted by the appellant, it is seen that the appellant was not able to submit endorse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....L Shrivastava - AIR 1957 SC 912, has held that additional evidence should not be allowed to be produced to enable a party to fill up a lacuna, especially when the appellant could have produce such evidence before lower authority but failed to do so without sufficient cause. Evidence created after proceedings have commenced is not permissible - Auto Stars v. CC-1993 (64) ELT (100) CEGAT. Assessment on basis of fresh material not permissible. Appellate authority cannot take into consideration any fresh or new material which was not before the assessing officer but subsequently comes to light Indian Oil Corpn Ltd v. State of Orissa (2008) 15 VST 497 (Ori HC DB)." 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to Rule 112 of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, the Appellate Authority any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal; or (d) where the adjudicating authority or, as the case may be, the Appellate Authority has made the order appealed against without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidence relevant to any ground of appeal." 6. We find substance in the contention urged on behalf of the petitioner that the perception of the appellate authority is contrary to the four exceptions relied upon, within which the petitioner's case is contended to fall. In any event, it could have been also appropriate for the appellate authority to remand the proceedings to the original authority, if any additional material produced by the petitioner requires exa....