9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 830X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Dixit, DR JUDGEMENT Per Sahab Singh : This is an appeal filed by M/s Central Mine Planning and Design Institute (hereinafter referred to as appellant) against Order in Appeal No. 53/BPL/2008 dated 08.05.2008 passed by Commissioner (Appeal) Bhopal. 2. Appellant is engaged in providing the services under category of Engineering Consultation services. Appellant has submitted a refund claim on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cial year. He submits that appellant is entitled to adjust the excess payment of service tax under Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules. There is no time limit prescribed under this Rule for making adjustment of excess service tax paid by the assessee. He submits that unjust enrichment cannot be invoked to this case. 4. Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue submits that appellant has never requested for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not so provided by him either wholly or partially for any reason, the assessee may adjust the excess service tax so paid by him (calculated on a pro rate basis) against the service tax liability for the subsequent period, if the assessee has refunded the value of taxable service and the service tax thereon to the person from whom it was received. Ongoing through this sub-rule, we find the excess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is no time limit prescribed under sub-rule 6(3) for making adjustment.
6. In view of the above we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the original authority for considering the claim of the appellant under sub-rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rule 1994 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.
7. Appeal is disposed of by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
