9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER Per: Ramesh Nair This appeal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No.US/536/RGD/2012 dated 03.09.2012 whereby the appeal filed by respondent was allowed. The fact of the case is that the appellant have filed a refund claim aggregating to ? 35,26,753/- which was rejected by Original Authority on the ground that the appellant is not entitled for refund in respect of service tax paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lare the same along with Bank Account number of Customs. In the present case the respondent had exported the goods not in the capacity of a manufacturer-exporter, who has got Central Excise Registration but as non-manufacturer exporter. Therefore the refund is not admissible to them. 3. Ms. Sparsh Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the respondent are engage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not under dispute. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that only ground made by the Revenue that the refund claim was filed by the non-manufacturer-exporter therefore they should have filed refund in Form A-2 and failure to comply the same not entitled to claim. We have observed that the appellant unit is the manufacturing unit for which para (2)(b) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the refund claim does not mean that they are non-manufacturer and non-registered unit. Though the Registered Office filed the refund claim but it is in respect of manufacturing unit. Accordingly they have rightly followed the conditions of para (2)(b) of Notification by filing refund in Form A-1, therefore there is no substance in the grounds of Revenue's appeal. We do not find any infirmity in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
