9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 945X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellants Shri Ranjan Khanna & Shri Amresh Jain, ARS for the Respondent ORDER Both the appeals are taken up together as the issue involved is identical. 2. As per facts on record, the appellants are engaged in export of Business Auxiliary services and are entitled to rebate of service tax paid on various services in terms of provisions of Rule 5 of Export of Service Rules, 2005 read ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been filed at a later date after the export of services has taken place. The appellant has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Tribunal in case of Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi vs. Convergys India P Ltd. (Supra) wherein it has been held that late filing of the declaration as per Notification dated 19.4.05 is only a procedural lapse. The appellant is also taking recourse to their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellate authority did not condone the delay on the ground that there was repeated and purposeful omission in filing the declaration. However, we are informed that out of 15 refund claims of the same assessee, there was delay only in three cases, one of which was the subject matter before the Commissioner (Appeals). As such, the observation of the appellate authority that there is repeated delay i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the view that mere late filing of declaration where the Government can verify it subsequently, can not be a ground adopted for denial of the substantive benefit, if otherwise available to the assessee. 7. At this stage, learned DR informed that as refund was rejected on preliminary ground itself, the documents were not examined and claim was not otherwise verified. Learned advocate agrees. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
