2013 (12) TMI 491

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ER In these 4 appeals, the appellants are contesting rejection of refund claims filed by them in respect of Service Tax paid on Stevedoring and Documentation charges. 2. Heard both sides. 3. I find that the claims have been rejected on the ground that stevedoring and documentation charges have not been specified in the Notification No. 17/2009-S.T., dated 7-7-2009 under which the clai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ervices were not specified in the Notification No. 17/2009-S.T. However, the lower authority has looked at the classification of services provided by the service provider and refund has been denied. But while sanctioning the refund claim, what is to be examined is whether service tax has been paid under the category of services which is notified under the notification or not. There is no dispute t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... quired to be examined is whether service tax was paid and it has been paid under the category of services listed in the notification or not. Since there is no dispute that service tax has been paid under the category of port services, denial of service tax cannot be sustained. In the result, all the appeals are allowed with consequential relief to the appellants. (Dictated and pronounced in Court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X