2018 (3) TMI 271 - AT - Service Tax

Rectification of mistake - Revenue s ground is that the Refund application filed by the appellant claiming refund of excess duty paid by GAIL should have been filed with the jurisdictional authorities of GAIL rather than filing with their jurisdictional central excise authorities - Held that - Tribunal in the case of Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. v. CCE, Indore 2017 (1) TMI 549 - CESTAT NEW DELHI has dealt with an identical issue and has held that the jurisdiction to entertain refund claims lie with the excise authorities of the service provider as also of the service recipient - ROM application dismissed.

Summary

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD rejected the Revenue's rectification of mistake application regarding a refund claim, stating that the jurisdiction to entertain refund claims lies with the excise authorities of the service provider and recipient. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support this decision.