2017 (2) TMI 438 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - rejection on the ground that refund claim was filed by not fulfilling the conditions of N/N. 41/2007, inasmuch as it was filed before the wrong forum - whether the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly remanded the matter to the Adjudicating authority to examine the refund application on merit, when the initial refund claim was filed before the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax instead of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise? Held that - I do not find any discrepancy in the said order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) as he has only condoned the filing of refund claim before the inappropriate authority, and remanded the matter to the proper authority for scrutiny of the same - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against rejection of refund claim due to filing with the wrong authority under Notification No.41/2007-ST.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against the rejection of a refund claim filed by the Appellants with the wrong authority. The Appellants had filed a refund claim of service tax paid on services used in goods exported, following the procedure under Notification No.41/2007-ST. However, the claim was submitted to the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax in Vadodara instead of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise in Bharuch. This led to a show cause notice proposing rejection of the claim, which was subsequently rejected after adjudication. The Appellants appealed this decision, and the matter was remanded by the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration on merit.

The Revenue contended that the appeal was erroneously allowed as the Appellants did not meet the conditions of Notification No.41/2007. On the other hand, the Respondents argued that they had fulfilled all conditions but filed the claim with the wrong authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the case for a review of the refund claim based on the evidence presented.

The key issue was whether the Commissioner (Appeals) acted correctly in remanding the matter for the Adjudicating authority to assess the refund application's merit despite the initial filing with the wrong authority. The presiding Member found no fault in the Commissioner's decision, stating that the Commissioner had only condoned the improper filing and directed a review by the appropriate authority.

In conclusion, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed for lacking merit, and the jurisdictional authority was instructed to evaluate the refund claim on its merits. The cross objection was also disposed of, and the decision was dictated and pronounced in open court.