9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agency. However, agreement between appellant & MMTC, Arbitration Clause and other facts indicate that there is a link between the goods exported and the appellant through M/s MMTC and sellers are under obligation to accept the full liability , if any, without dispute. Therefore, in view of decision in case of State of Karnataka Vs. Azad Coach Builders Pvt. Ltd (2010 - TMI - 211475 - Supreme Court Of India), we remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision. - S.T.Appeal No.351/2010 - - - Dated:- 23-3-2012 - DR. D. M. MISRA, J. Shri B.Panda Shri B. B. Shaw, both Advs. for the Appellant (s) Shri S. Chakraborty, Asstt. Commr. (A.R.) for the Department Per Dr. D. M. Misra : This is an appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 26th February, 2009. It is his submission that the sale agreement entered with M/s MMTC, refers to the sale contract between M/s MMTC and M/s Metrollogic Resources AG, Switzerland, to whom the goods are to be ultimately exported by M/s Orissa Mining Corporation (M/s OMC) through M/s MMTC being canalizing agency. It is his submission that even if the agreement seems to be a sale and purchase agreement between the appellant and M/s MMTC, but in fact it has been entered with the sale purposes of export of the Chrome Concentrate. It is his submission that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in reading the said agreement. The ld. Advocate has taken through various clauses of the sale agreement which indicate that the goods sold to M/s M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Hence, principle of law of the above cited case, could not be placed before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 4. On the other hand, the ld.A.R. appearing for the Department reiterates the findings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). He has submitted that the said Notification 17/2009-ST dated 7.7.2009, allows the benefit of refund of service tax paid only to the exporter, M/s MMTC Ltd. not the appellant. Therefore, the refund of service tax is rightly denied to the appellants. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. It is not in dispute that the goods manufactured by the appellants had been exported through M/s MMTC in view of the Export Import Policy, 2004-2009. In the said Policy, it has been clearly laid down that the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
