9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved in some commercial activity or not. The appellant has not provided these documents to the Commissioner (Appeals), but has produced the same before the Tribunal. Thus the lower authorities should be given an opportunity to consider the issue based upon the documents. Thus remand the matter back to first appellate authority to re-consider the issue afresh, after following the principles of natural justice. - Appeal No.ST/35/2012 - - - Dated:- 19-3-2013 - Mr. M.V. Ravindaran , J. For the Appellant: Shri Gunjan Shah, Chartered Accountant For the Respondent : Shri K. Sivakumar, Addl.Commissioner (A.R.) JUDGEMENT Per: M.V. Ravindran: This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No.268/2011(STC)/ K.Anpazha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs CESTAT, Mumbai 2010 (259) ELT 369 (Bom.). It was held that self-assessment could be challenged by filing an appeal only. The claimant was failed to submit evidence in respect of filing any appeal against the said self-assessment. d) The claimant has not submitted any document/evidence to the effect that the incidence of Service Tax has not been passed on to the clients/customers. The claimant vide their submission dt.11.03.2011 stated that they have not passed on the incidence of taxation to any one which can be verified from the work order which says that the amount of consideration includes all taxes. Moreover, they have not charged Service Tax separately on their bills. It implies that the amount received by the claimant from GUD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icated in the said agreement and the appellant having discharged the Service Tax which was not leviable, is eligible to claim the refund. 6. Ld.Additional Commissioner (A.R.) submits that the appellants claim has been rejected for unjust enrichment by the adjudicating authority and the appellant has not produced any evidence before lower authorities despite specifically asked so by the Commissioner (Appeals). He would read Para 9 of the impugned order. 7. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of the records, I find that the first appellate authority vide his letter dt.29.09.2011, has called for the copy of the agreement with the ULB/GUDC, copy of approved plan of the building or civil construction, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
