9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in the appeal filed, wherein the appellant stated that they have deposited the tax in response to the repeated correspondence and had reiterated that the matter is sub-judice with regard to levy of service tax. There is no limitation applicable for the refund claimed by the appellants - the Adjudicating Authority is directed to grant refund within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, alongwith interest as per rules. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - S. T. Appeal Nos. 50954-50955/2020-SM - FINAL ORDER Nos. 51859 – 51860/2021 - Dated:- 17-9-2021 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Ms. Shilpi Jain Sharma, Advocate for the appellant Shri Ravi Kapur, Authorised Represen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal outcome of the Writ Petition. The Hon ble High Court has also taken notice that the levy under reverse charge itself was under challenge and SLP was admitted by the Hon ble Supreme Court, which was pending decision and accordingly the Madras High Court has observed that the parties would be bound by the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court. Further, liberty was granted to the appellant again to approach the High Court, if the issue are not settled by the order of the Hon ble Supreme Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was closed/ disposed off. 4. Thereafter, the appellants received letter dated 12.11.2008 from the Anti Evasion Wing, advised it to deposit the tax as regards to overseas provider, under Business Auxiliary Service . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6910211/00010 Oct. 2008 to March 2009 7,66,364/- September 22, 2010 6910211/00011 April 2009 to June, 2009 1,04,887/- September 22, 2010 6910211/00012 July 2009 to March, 2010 7,51,295/- Total 21,91,911/- 5. The appellant by its letter dated 27.09.2010 addressed to the Superintendent (AE), informed that in response to the direction by Revenue regarding payment of service tax on commission paid to overseas agents, on the export booke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ised to one year, vide Notification No. 18/2009-ST, and further as they have paid under protest, after being compelled to pay by the Revenue, accordingly, the limitation from the date of export under Section 11B is not applicable. 8. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that from the facts on record the appellant have not been able to substantiate that they have deposited the tax under dispute, under protest. Accordingly, the rejection of refund claim was upheld. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 9. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant reiterates the facts herein above and further stated that in view of the correspondence, following the stay granted by the Hon ble Madras High Court by its order in W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
