9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. [Order]. - Refund claim made by the appellant for Rs. 50,127/- for the period from March 2009 to June 2009, in respect of service tax paid by them on various services received by them under the Notification No. 9/2009-S.T. has been rejected on the ground that the documents on which the refund was claimed were not specified documents as per Rule 4(a) of Service Tax Rules, 1994. Acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued certificates stating that they had actually paid service tax claimed as refund by the appellant. He also drew my attention to the Tribunal decision in the case of Pharma Labs Process Equipments Pvt. Limited. v. C.C.E., Ahmd. - 2009-TIOL-2215-CESTAT-AHMD dated 22-4-2009 = 2009 (16) S.T.R. 94 (Tri.-Ahmd.) = 2009 (242) E.L.T. 467 (Tri.-Ahmd.) to submit that if the debit note contains all the deta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant had availed cenvat credit and was claiming refund of cenvat credit under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Learned DR submitted that there is a clear observation that the debit note also did not contain necessary details and drew my attention to the observations of the Commissioner (Appeals) to this effect. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order has stated that the orig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other conditions which are required to be fulfilled as per Notification No. 9/2009-S.T. have been fulfilled. The only objection of the Revenue is that the service tax was paid on the basis of debit notes issued and no on the basis of invoice, bill or challans. I find that the issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pharma Lab Process Equipments Pvt. Limited, discussed abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
