9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order]. - Both the appeals are being disposed off by a common order as the issue involved is identical. 2. As per facts on record the appellants are engaged in business of accounting services, back office operations, data processing, call centre, etc. falling under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Services'. They are registered 100% EOU and exporting their output service and not s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Thus the appellant were not eligible for refund of input service credit for the period from April 07 to September 07. 4. Being aggrieved with the above order the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which stands rejected by him on the ground that as the appellant obtained the registration with the Service tax department on 28-12-07 and filed refund of cenvat credit accumu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ular that they registered themselves with the service tax department. 5. In any case submits, the learned advocate that the refund claim filed for the earlier periods were remanded by Commissioner (Appeals) to the original adjudicating authority. In de novo proceedings the Deputy Commissioner vide his order dated 14-7-09 has considered the issue of refund claim pertaining to the period before reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner has examined the issue at length and has allowed the refund claim. It is not on record as to whether the order passed by Deputy Commissioner stands accepted by the Revenue or not. 8. In view of the above discussions, I set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo decision, by taking note of his earlier order as also any other mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
