9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra Heard both sides. This appeal is filed against the Order-in- Appeal No.56/2010 (BVR)KCG/Commr(A)/Ahd. dated 5.7.2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals III), Central Excise, Ahmedabad. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant had filed a refund claim of Service Tax paid on the goods exported under Notification No.41/2007-ST dt 6.10.2007 on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority and pointing out other short comings they re-submitted the refund claim on 08.4.2009. It is his contention that since refund claim was initially filed with the wrong authority and later being returned and filed with the proper authority having jurisdiction to decide the case, hence, the refund claims are not barred by limitation. In support, he has referred to the judgment of Hon'ble Guj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Notification is time barred. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. I have gone through the refund claim which has been filed initially on 29.12.2008. I find that in the Annexure attached to the prescribed proforma the details of invoices, shipping bills, value, Service Tax paid etc. alongwith classification of service on which refund was claimed are clearly mentioned. It is the conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessary documents and can satisfy the Original Authority about fulfillment of all the conditions of the said Notification. I find that in similar circumstances, this Tribunal vide Order 04.01.2015 has already remanded the claims for verification of documents to ascertain the eligibility of the refund claim under the said Notification. Consequently, this Appeal is also remanded to the Adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
