M/S.Gillooram Gaurishankar vs Cce & St, Ranchi

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.18/RAN/2008 dated 04.02.2008 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi.)

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE

HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT(Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any Authorative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Authorities?

M/s.Gillooram Gaurishankar

Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)

Vs.

CCE & ST, Ranchi

Respondent (s)

Appearance:

Shri Kartik Kurmi & Shri S.B.Sharma, Adv.s for the Appellant (s)

Shri A.K.Biswas, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue (s)

CORAM:

Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial)

Date of Hearing/Decision :- 28.8.2015 Date of Pronouncement :- 28.8.2015

ORDER NO.FO/A/75456/2015

Per Dr. D.M. Misra.

1. Heard both sides.

2. This is an Appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No.18/RAN/2008 dated 04.02.2008 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) of Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi.

3. Shri Kartik Kurmy, ld.Adv. for the appellant submits that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has upheld the rejection of refund order passed by the adjudicating authority on the ground that the photocopies submitted by the appellant were illegible and also matching copies of the relevant documents were not forwarded by the Land Customs Station at Raxaul. The ld.Adv. categorically submits that they are now in possession of all original documents by which they could satisfy the eligibility of the refund claim. He prays that the matter may be remanded to the ld.Commissioiner(Appeals) for examination of those documents and decision on merit afresh. Further he prays that since the matter has been pending for more than two decades a time frame may be fixed for disposal of the appeal.

4. The ld.AR for the Revenue fairly accepts that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) could not decide the issue, but rejected the appeal for want of necessary documentary evidences.

5. I find that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) in the impugned order had observed that neither the appellant furnished the legible copies nor the Assistant Commissioners Office, Land Customs Station, Raxaul could also assist him in providing necessary document/evidences so as to examine the refund claim rejected by the adjudicating authority. The ld.Adv. now claims that they are having all original documents and they can satisfy about the eligibility of refund claim. Accordingly, with the consent of both sides, the matter is remanded to the ld. Commissioner(Appeals) for deciding the issues afresh taking into consideration the documents/evidences that would be placed by the appellant. Taking note of the concern of the ld.Adv., it is felt appropriate to direct the ld.Commissioner to decide the issue as far as practicable within 3(three) months from the date of communication of this order. Appeal is allowed by way of remand.

(Pronounced and dictated in the open court.)

SD/

(D.M.MISRA) MEMBER(JUDICIAL) sm

3 Appeal No.EA-230/08