2014 (12) TMI 703

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... : R.K. Singh; The appellant filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 87/BPL/2012 dated 24.04.2012 which upheld Order-in-Original No. 20/Refund/ST/JBP/2011 dated 01.08.2011. The appellants filed a refund claim of Rs. 20,77,511/- under Notification No. 17/2007-ST in respect of service tax paid on services relating to export of iron orefine. The original adjudicating authority sanctioned the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ould not sail and therefore the consignment was off loaded and subsequently exported through vessel MVKS Pioneer and that the refund claim should not be denied merely because the invoices do not show the name of MV XN DA. The appellants have further contended that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) never asked them to produce any proof to show that the same goods which were first loaded on ship MV XN .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ect to claim that no personal hearing was granted. However, there is substance in the appellants assertion that had the Commissioner (Appeals) asked them the reason for claiming refund of service tax on services relating to MV XN DA they would have been able to satisfy him about the sustainability of their claim. In these circumstances, we deem it fit that the appellants should get another opport .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X