9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingh: These Appeals have been filed against Order-in-Appeal No.47-48/ST/ALLD/2008, dated 19.12.2008 which upheld the respective Orders-in-Original in terms of which the appellants' refund claims for Rs. 51204.26 and Rs. 45,530.88/- for the quarter October, 2007 to December, 2007 and January, 2008 to March, 2008 respectively (in terms of Notification Nos.40/2007-ST, dated 17.09.2007 and 41/200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions of the appellants and perused the records. There is substance in the appellants' contention that they filed the refund claim in time because even if there were some short comings therein, those were rectifiable. However, we find that the original adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority have clearly noted that the appellants have not submitted the evidence of payment of serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anks and as rightly noted by Commissioner (Appeals), those details could not be correlated/corroborated vis-a-vis the details in the said tables. 4. It is thus seen that the appellants have not been able to produce the minimum documentary evidence (as required in terms of the said notifications; e.g. para (f) of Notification No.41/2007-ST) to show that the service in respect of which the refunds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
