9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 881X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount to TNEB which was originally collected in excess and filed the refund claim - Held that:- it is seen from the adjudication order that the appellant placed copy of the trial balance as on 31st March 2004 wherein they have claimed the amounts sought for refund as 'receivables'. The appellant by their letter dt. 16.2.2005 submitted that they have refunded the amount to the TNEB towards excess c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vocate For the Respondent : Shri M. Rammohan Rao, JC (AR) JUDGEMENT Per Pradip Kumar Das; 1. The appellant is a Govt of Tamil Nadu Enterprise registered with the Service Tax authorities under Banking and other Financial Services'. They filed a refund claim on 28.4.2004 for Rs.12,48,187/- on the ground that they paid the tax at 8% instead of 5%. The adjudicating authority re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.-LB). The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Union of India Vs A.K. Spintex Ltd. - 2009 (234) ELT 41 (Raj.) after considering the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of S.Kumar's Ltd. (supra) rejected the appeal filed by Revenue and observed that once the assessee leads reliable evidence about appellant's having got passed the burden on the purchaser, an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the trial balance as on 31st March 2004 wherein they have claimed the amounts sought for refund as 'receivables'. The appellant by their letter dt. 16.2.2005 submitted that they have refunded the amount to the TNEB towards excess collection of service tax for the period from 1.4.2003 to 13.5.2003. On perusal of the adjudication order, it is not clear that as to whether TNEB refunded the am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
