9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ekha Beevi C.S. The appellant is aggrieved that his refund claim was rejected as being time barred. 2. The appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 92,014/- of service Tax paid during the period Jan/2009 to Nov./2012 in relation to the service as sub agent of Western Union/Money Gram. The claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority for the reason that the duty/tax was not deposited under prote ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -7 Challans which mentioned the words under protest,. The refund claim of Rs. 33781/- was rejected for the reason that in the GAR-7 Challans pertaining to this amount there was no remarks of under protest, and therefore was barred by limitation. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for appellants referred to the judgement laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.C.E. Tiruchirappalli Vs. CESTAT, Chennai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eposits which are made under protest. That the mere marking of the words under protest, in Challans would not help providing such information to the Department. I find some substance in these submissions made by the Department. In the G.A.R. -7 Challans dated 5.3.2009, 31.3.2009, 3.7.2009 and 5.10.2012, the appellant has not endorsed the words under protest. Where as in GAR-7 Challans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
