9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplement the provisions of main Act and grant of relief of refund of service tax paid on services used in export of goods has to be sanctioned to the respondent when conditions prescribed in the main Act are fulfilled. Main conditions as laid down in the act are fulfilled i.e. there has to be export of goods and the service tax liability has to be paid to the service provider and the same must have been used for the export of the goods which conditions are fulfilled by the respondent. - impugned order is correct and legal and does not require any interference. - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. ST/88/10 - - - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - M. V. Ravindran, Member (J) And C. J. Mathew, Member (T) For the Petitioner : Shri R K Das, Depu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Co. 2010 (260) ELT 487 (S.C.). 5. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent would submit that the dispute is only regarding the time period for filing the refund claim. He would submit that there is no dispute as to the fact that the respondent is eligible for the amount of refund claim. He would submit that the first appellate authority has considered the issue holistically and held that filing of the refund claim is procedural lapse which can be condoned. He would rely upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Sandoz polymers Pvt. Ltd. 2013 (30) STR 527 and Raymond Ltd. 2015 (38) STR 441 for the said proposition and also submit that in both the cases as stated by him, the very same issue was decided in favour of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods. Inasmuch as the appellant filed the refund claims in July, 2009 for the quarter ending October-December, 2008, the refund claims are within a period of one year from the date of export of the goods. Therefore, the appellant would be eligible for the benefit of refund under the aforesaid Notification subject to satisfaction of other conditions stipulated in the Notification. 5.1 The Honble High Court of Bombay, which is the jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Uttam Steel Ltd. (supra) has held that when procedure and practice are amended they have to be amended retrospectively and the benefit allowed if the procedures are satisfied. This Tribunal in the case of Sandoz Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has also held the same view. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
