9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat there is no evidence of receipt of the said letter in the office of the Superintendent or Assistant Commissioner, the said letter has to be interpreted as being under coercion and pressure from the Revenue and not from free will of the appellant. As such, the duty having been deposited under protest in the challans itself, the refund claim cannot be held to be barred by limitation. The said aspect requires verification and examination by the Lower Authorities from the contracts entered between the two as also from the certificate issued by the Ghaziabad Development Authority read with definition of works contract - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Service Tax Appeal No.70541 of 2018-Division Bench - FINAL ORDER NO.- 71322 / 2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund claim on the grounds that the services provided by them to Ghaziabad Development Authority were not works contract and refund claim is hit by bar of limitation. During the course of adjudication as also Appellate process, the appellant produced on record the works contract as also the statement of Ghaziabad Development Authority to substantiate their plea that the services provided by them were works contract. As regards the limitation they submitted that as the duty was deposited under protest, the limitation aspect would not apply. 4. Lower Authorities did not find favour with the assessee s contention. As regards works contract, it was observed that the appellant have not established beyond doubt that composite works ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rotest. When the said letter was taken to the office of the Superintendent, he did not accept the same and the said letter was returned to them. The Lower Authorities have not advanced any evidence to show that the said letter was actually filed by them. On the contrary Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the assessee has not produced any evidence to establish that the same was not filed. 6. We find that the negative onus to establish that the letter was not filed with the Revenue cannot be put on the assessee. It is the Revenue who is insisting that the said letter was filed and as such it is for them to establish that the same was actually filed. 7. Otherwise also, we find that the deposit of dues was durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
