9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well settled law that the substantive benefits if otherwise available, should not be disallowed on the ground of violation of procedural conditions - reliance was placed in the case of WESTERN CANS P. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., MUMBAI-I [2011 (3) TMI 757 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/40002 and 40003/2017-SM - E/40002 and 40003/2017-SM - Dated:- 19-5-2017 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant: Ms. Vigneswari, Adv. For the Respondent: Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) 19-05-2017 ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa A very short issue is involved in the present appeal. The appellant is a registered Unit functioning in a Special Economic Zone. In terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rejecting the refund claims. 4. On an appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of two appeals of the assessee involving the same issue and observed that the second ground i.e., non-inclusion of Rent-a-Cab Service in authorized services cannot be adopted as a ground, in as much as, Rent-a-Cab Service was approved by UCA with retrospective effect from 01.07.2017. However, he rejected the appeals on the ground that the appellant had already filed a refund claim for a particular quarter in respect of other services and as such filing of second refund claim in respect of the same quarter, though, in respect of different services, cannot be allowed. 5. The learned advocate appearing for the appellants submit that the condition of the notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the legislative intent to avoid multiplicity of refund claims on a day-to-day basis or weekly basis or invoices-wise. The same does not mean that an assessee has to file refund claims quarterly and that cannot be the intention of the legislature. Even if the refunds are filed once in a year, the same would also avoid the multiplicity. In the present case, the refund claim filed by the appellant in respect of Rent-a-Cab Service is beyond their control, in as much as, the said service was approved belatedly. As such, no fault can be found with the appellant's action. The notification, in substance, allows the refund of service tax so paid on SEZ Unit and denial of the same on the ground of violation of procedural requirements cannot be u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
