Case Law Details
Insecticides India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of C G & S T, Jammu (CESTAT Chandigarh)
It is an admitted fact that earlier orders of this Tribunal have been accepted by the Revenue and no appeal has been filed against those orders. In the absence of any challenge to the orders of this Tribunal, the adjudicating authority was duty bound to implement the orders of this Tribunal which they failed to do so. Further, in earlier round of litigation, the orders of this Tribunal were final. The decision relied upon by the ld. AR in the case of ACIT Rajkot vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd (supra) is not applicable to the facts of this case as in that case, the issue was alive by filing the application for rectification of mistake. There is no such case in these matters, therefore, the said decision cannot be applied here. In that circumstance, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has exercised the power without any authority of law, the act of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is bad in law. The adjudicating authority is directed to implement the orders passed by this Tribunal in earlier round of litigation as chart mentioned herein above within 30 days of receipt of this order.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHANDIGARH ORDER
This is second round of litigation. In earlier round of litigation, this Tribunal has passed the orders sanctioning the refund claim of the appellants. Instead of implementing the orders of this Tribunal, the authorities below passed the impugned orders rejecting the refund claim of the appellant. These appeals are arising out of order-in-original as follows:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
