9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed:- 4-6-2010 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY: Shri D.K. Trivedi, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Avinash Thete, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order] - The appellant is a 100 / EOU engaged in manufacture of laboratory equipments, parts and accessories falling under Chapter 90 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant purchased their raw materials and inputs from the domestic market on payment of appropriate duty and have taken Cenvat credit of the duty paid on such raw materials and inputs under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. As the entire production is exported to all over the world and in the circumstances when the appellant have no clearance in the Domestic Tariff Area, the appellant h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal filed by the appellants. The appellants filed appeals before Tribunal against the said OIA. This Tribunal vide Order No. A/1406-1414/AHD/08 dated 17-7-08 [2009(236) E.L.T. 514 (Tri.)] remanded the matter back to the Original Adjudicating Authority to consider the refund claim afresh in the light of the observations made in the order. The Original Adjudicating Authority decided the matter afresh and issued present impugned orders as listed in table at para 1 above. In adjudicating afresh lower adjudicating authority again rejected the entire refund claim in respect of the Sr. Nos. 1 2 above on the ground that during the month of May 2006 and June 2006 i.e. the month sc to which the refund claim relates, there was no export. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit. What was required to be examined was whether the credit taken was correct and whether it could have been used for adjustment or not and whether the goods have been exported. This was the observation of the Tribunal while remanding the matter whereas both the lower authorities have interpreted this direction wrongly. 6. The Commissioner has allowed the benefit of service tax paid on Customs House Agent Service on the ground that the Tribunal decisions and the Board's circular support the view that where the goods are exported and the sale is on FOB/CIF basis, the place of removal has to be load port only. However he has rejected the claim for benefit of refund of service tax with regard to Air Freight service on the ground that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
