9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is to be made to the jurisdictional authority in whose jurisdiction registered premise of the service provider exists. It follows that in absence of registration, identity of the jurisdictional authority is not ascertainable - Notification being part of legislation, is to be strictly construed for grant of the fiscal benefit and burden to prove that grant is permissible lies on the claimant. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra 3 of the notification says that application for refund shall be made to the jurisdictional authority in whose jurisdiction the registered premises from which output service are exported is situated. The notification has two aspects one is, refund is permissible only against an application and such an application is filed before the authority where the registered premises of the service provider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund application is to be made to the jurisdictional authority in whose jurisdiction registered premise of the service provider exists. It follows that in absence of registration, identity of the jurisdictional authority is not ascertainable. The mandate of law under para 3 of the notification, is reproduced as under, in so far as that is relevant to the disposal of the appeal, demonstrates that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mant. The admitted case of the respondent being non-registration of the premises from which exportable services was provided, appellant failed to discharge its burden of proof and also did not fulfill the conditions of the notification. As a result of which Revenue appeal no. E/40921/2016 is allowed, setting aside the order passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) ST/40920 40922/2016: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
