9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... On perusal of the clause 2(f), the said clause talks about submission of refund claim accompanied by the documents evidencing (i) export of goods, (ii) payment of service tax on the specified services for which claim for refund of service tax and (iii) wherever applicable, a copy of the written agreement entered into by the exporter with the buyer of the goods. The only proof, which the appellant could not produce or submit when they filed refund claim was in respect of payment of service tax. Subsequently it has been rectified and informed that the appellant had been able to submit proof of payment of service tax along with bank realization certificate, I find that the view taken by the first appellate authority is incorrect, unsustainabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervices received from them in respect of exports made during the quarter July 2008 to September 2008. The refund claim was received in the Divisional Officer on 31/03/2009. The Revenue officer after initial scrutiny of the refund claim, issued a deficiency memo dt. 06/04/2009 calling for certain additional documents and also returned the refund claim. The appellant resubmitted the claim along with the documents called for in the deficiency memo. The adjudicating authority after deducting the ineligible service tax amount of Rs.1,93,776/- sanctioned refund of Rs.2,71,634/- under Section 83 of Finance Act 1994 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. Aggrieved by such an order of sanctioning refund by the adjudicating authority, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , he relied upon the decision of the Honble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Sudhir Papers Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore-I [2012(276) ELT 304 (Kar.)]. It is also his submission that the refund claim which was filed by the appellant could not have been returned by the Superintendent as he has no authority to return the same. 4. The learned DR on the other hand would reiterate the findings of the first appellate authority. It is his submission that the appellant had filed initially refund claim without the bank realization certificate and proof of payment of service tax is an accepted fact. It is his submission that as per Notification No.41/2007-ST,, condition No.2(f), appellant was required to submit refund claim accompanying with all t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant on 27/04/2009 is hit by the clause 2(f) of the Notification No.41/2007-ST as amended. On perusal of the said clause, the said clause talks about submission of refund claim accompanied by the documents evidencing (i) export of goods, (ii) payment of service tax on the specified services for which claim for refund of service tax and (iii) wherever applicable, a copy of the written agreement entered into by the exporter with the buyer of the goods. It can be seen that there is no dispute as to the fact that the goods were exported by the appellants. The only proof, which the appellant could not produce or submit when they filed refund claim was in respect of payment of service tax. Subsequently it has been rectified and informed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
