9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 955X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of this Court in spite of an alternate remedy of an Appeal under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1994. 3. The Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. It is with the business of providing customer services, data management and back office administration services for the airline, travel and transportation industry. The Petitioner had obtained a registration for taxable service category of business auxiliary services. According to the Petitioner the Petitioner could not utilize a CENVAT Credit availed on input services used in export of business auxiliary services. The Petitioner centralized its registration at Mumbai of all their units and the refund claims were subsequently transferred to the office of the Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riod before the date of registration. The Commissioner held that in the absence of original input and output invoices, it is not possible to ascertain authenticity of the claim. He held that copies of all self attested input service invoices as eligible for CENVAT Credit, copies of self attested output service invoices, nexus statement have not been produced. The Commissioner concluded that the Petitioner had not fulfilled the basic condition of Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and Rule 6A of Service Tax Rules, 1994. Accordingly, the Assistant Commissioner, by the impugned order rejected the claim of refund of the Petitioner of Rs. 3,32,77,659/-. 5. We have heard Mr. Nankarni, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Walv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... original documents were submitted, whether they were germane for the purpose of the enquiry in respect of refund as contemplated in law. This aspect, in view of the statements in the impugned order and the affidavit-inreply, is a disputed question of fact. 8. Section 35 of the Central Excise Act provides an appeal to the Commissioner - Appeals. There is no dispute that the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner is appealable under Section 35 to the Commissioner - Appeals. Therefore, this disputed question of fact has to be decided in the statutory appeal provided under Section 35 of the Act. Therefore, on both counts, that the Petition involved disputed question of fact and that a statutory remedy of appeal is available to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
