Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Sanctioning of Refund Claim of Service Tax Once it Already Sanctioned in Previous Order: CESTAT Declares Order as Void-abinitio [Read Order]
![Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Sanctioning of Refund Claim of Service Tax Once it Already Sanctioned in Previous Order: CESTAT Declares Order as Void-abinitio [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Commissioner-Appeals-Commissioner-Appeals-Quashes-Sanctioning-of-Refund-Claim-of-Service-Tax-Refund-Claim-of-Service-Tax-Claim-of-Service-Tax-Service-Tax-CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg "Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Sanctioning of Refund Claim of Service Tax Once it Already Sanctioned in Previous Order: CESTAT Declares Order as Void-abinitio [Read Order]")
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) declared the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) as void- abinitio on the ground of already sanctioned the refund claim in the previous order. W.S. Industries (India) Ltd, the appellant assessee filed a refund claim for refund and the Commissioner (Appeals) first rejected the balance amount of...
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) declared the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) as void- abinitio on the ground of already sanctioned the refund claim in the previous order.
W.S. Industries (India) Ltd, the appellant assessee filed a refund claim for refund and the Commissioner (Appeals) first rejected the balance amount of the refund claim and upheld the sanctioned amount for the refund later the Commissioner (Appeals) held in another appeal filed by the revenue that the entire refund claim had to be disallowed.
The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for rejecting the entire refund claim by the assessee.
P.C. Anand, the counsel for the assessee contended that once the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order passed by the original authority, he could not have set aside the same.
Further submitted that Once the order has been upheld, the same merges with the order passed by the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot further set aside the same.
Rudra Pratap Singh, the counsel for the department contended that the rejection of the refund claim done by the Commissioner (Appeals) was as per the law, and after the examination of all the evidence the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the entire claim.
The Bench observed that When an order has already been passed upholding the sanction of part of the refund claim, the same authority cannot pass another order setting aside the sanction of the entire claim and it will be considered as void-abinitio.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi C.S (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) quashed the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and restored the sanctioning part of the refund claim.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
