2018 (5) TMI 113

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t (s): Shri Sameer Chitkara, AR Per: Dr. D. M. Misra Heard both sides. 2. This is an appeal filed against the order-in-appeal No. APP-03-408/2016-2017 dated 04.11.2016 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax- Vadodara. 3. The short issue involved in the present appeal is: whether the appellant are entitled to refund of excess amount of service tax of Rs. 6,5 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected their appeal on the ground that the relevant work orders have not amended indicating the payment of less amount of value against deficit in taxable services. He submits that less taxable value has been received because the services rendered did not conform to the respective work orders, therefore, there is no necessity of amending the work orders menti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... basis or requirement to amend the work orders, to be eligible to the refund of excess service tax paid. It is quite natural that the value of service tax would be reduced by the service receivers, if the service provider failed to conform the services for which the work orders issued. In these circumstances, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X