9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refunds in two Appeal Nos. E/335/2012 and E/336/2012 and rejected the refund of service tax in Appeal No. E/3343/2012. Since the issue in all the appeals is identical and the impugned order is also one, therefore all the three appeals are being disposed of by the present order. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are manufacturing two wheeler motor vehicles and exported motor cycle spare parts out of India without claiming refund of service tax paid on the courier service valid for the export of goods under Notification No. 17/2009 ST dated 7.7.2009. The refund claim was originally sanctioned in two out of the three cases. Thereafter show-cause notices were issued to recover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urther submitted that the orders-in original sanctioning the two refund claims of the appellant have attained finality and same being an appealable order, new proceedings cannot be initiated without challenging the said orders. He further submitted that in the absence of any challenge to these final orders sanctioning refund, the present proceedings initiated for recovery of refund stands infructuous and cannot be sustained. In support of this submission, he relied upon the following decisions: 1) CC Vs Millat Fibres [2011(271)ELT 512(Guj) 2) Doothat Tea Estate Kanoi Plantation (P) Ltd Vs CCE Shillong [20019135)ELT 386(tri-Kol)] 3) Commissioner of C.Ex Shillong Vs Jellalpore Tea Estate [201(268)ELT 15 (Gau) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eign Exchange Management (Export of Goods & Services) Regulations, 2015 read with clause 2.37 under Chapter-2 of the Indian Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 make it abundantly clear that no amount is receivable for the export goods and there is no requirement of realization of export proceeds in case of warrantied replacement of goods. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decision in the case of CCE Raipur Vs Simplex Engg & Foundary Works Pvt Ltd [2016(333)ELT 112 (Tri-Del)]. The assessee therein filed rebate of duty paid on export of goods which was ultimately exported as replacement of the earlier defective goods. In the context of the requirement of realization of export proceeds, the Tribunal held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the refund have already attained finality and the Revenue has not filed any appeal against the sanctioning of the refund order and the Revenue wants to recover the erroneously sanctioned refund by parallel proceedings by issue of show-cause notice which is not permitted under law as held in the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant. Further I find that the appellants have exported the spare parts to their dealers abroad by way of free warranty replacement as per their contract which is placed on record and for exporting the said components they have availed the services of courier agency for which they have paid the service tax. I also find that the findings of the Commissioner(Appeals) that the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
