9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the specified services. Since the refund claim pertains to services prior to 1.4.2008, the appellant having sought refund under N/N. 40/2007 is not eligible for the refund since these are not specified / exempted services as per this notification - refund rightly rejected - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - ST/195/2010 - 43061/2017 - Dated:- 5-12-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have rejected refund claim on the following grounds:- (i) The services for which the present claim has been made are not the ones specified in the schedule of the said notification. (ii) The documents have been raised on different persons as service receiver but the assessee have claimed refund based on such documents (iii) Documents evidencing payment of service tax on the specifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered. It is also argued by the ld. counsel that the place of removal should not be treated as a factory gate and the goods having been exported, the place of removal has to be the port and in the light of CBEC Circular No.97/8/2007 dated 23.8.2007, appellant would be eligible for grant of refund. It is submitted by him that the authorities below have rejected the refund claim for the reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification has come into effect only from 1.4.2008. That therefore the authorities below have rightly denied the refund claim. 5. Heard both sides. 6. We find that the main contention for which the refund claim has been rejected is for the reason that the impugned services are not specified services as per Notification No.40/2007 dated 17.9.2007. It is not disputed that the appellant has f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
