2018 (9) TMI 1590 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of Service Tax paid - case of appellant is that they have not been issued a show cause notice proposing to deny the refund claim - principles of natural justice - Held that - A notice is a right of the party to enable him to know the grounds for rejection of the refund claim so as to arm himself to defend the case. It is the foundation of any lis in taxation proceedings. Without issuance of such show cause notice, the adjudicating authority has gone into the matter and rejected the refund claim. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the same and also added a further ground for rejection. The rejection of refund claim without issuance of show cause notice cannot sustain - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Rejection of refund claims under Notification No. 41/2007-ST for service tax paid by Customs House Agent.
2. Time-barred refund claim for the quarter ending January to March 2008.
3. Denial of refund based on the percentage of production for each unit.
4. CHA services not notified prior to 1.4.2008.
5. Non-issuance of show cause notice leading to violation of natural justice.

Analysis:
The appellants filed two refund claims for service tax paid by a Customs House Agent under Notification No. 41/2007-ST. The first claim for the quarter ending January to March 2008 was initially filed before the wrong forum, leading to rejection based on being time-barred. The second ground for rejection was the apportionment of input services based on the turnover of each factory, which was not allowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) also rejected the claims stating that CHA services were not notified before 1.4.2008. The appellants argued that rejection without a show cause notice was a violation of natural justice, as they were not given an opportunity to defend their case. They cited previous Tribunal decisions emphasizing the importance of issuing a show cause notice before rejecting refund claims.

The appellant's counsel contended that the rejection of refund claims without a show cause notice prevented them from presenting their defense adequately. They highlighted that even though a personal hearing was conducted, it did not substitute the necessity of a formal notice outlining the grounds for rejection. The Tribunal observed that the lack of a show cause notice infringed upon the appellants' right to defend their case properly. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision emphasizing the necessity of issuing a show cause notice before rejecting refund claims. The Tribunal concluded that the rejection without a show cause notice could not be sustained, allowing the appeals filed by the appellants with any consequential relief.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, emphasizing the importance of issuing a show cause notice before rejecting refund claims to ensure natural justice and the right to defend one's case effectively. The decision underscored the significance of procedural fairness in adjudicating refund claims, highlighting the need for proper notification of grounds for rejection to enable parties to present their case adequately.