9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, if the refund claims are filed on a quarterly basis. The assertions of the learned advocate are found to be correct insofar as his contentions that the Revenue has not disputed the eligibility or otherwise of the cenvat credit is concerned. Hence, Revenue cannot be disputed the eligibility when the refund of the input service credit is claimed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Service Tax appeal No.930 of 2009 Service Tax appeal No.535 of 2010 - Final Order No: 20135-20136 / 2022 - Dated:- 31-3-2022 - MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, TECHNICAL MEMBER AND MR. P DINESHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri N. Anand, Advocate for the assessee. Smt. C.V. Savitha, Superintendent(AR) for the Revenue. ORDER The assessee-appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e input services while rejecting the balance 7 inputs services as ineligible input services. He would further submit that the Revenue having not objected to the availment of the cenvat credit on input services, the Revenue cannot be permitted to deny the refunds on the ground of ineligibility. In a nutshell, he would submit that the Department cannot question eligibility to credit while adjudicating the refund claim of the appellant under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. He would also rely on the following orders of various Benches of the Tribunal in support of his claim:- i. Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCT [2021(52) GSTL 425 (Tri. Bang.)] ii. K. Line Ship Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE [2017-TIOL-2406-CESTAT-MUM] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the purposes of examining if the claim is filed within the limitation prescribed under Section 11B or otherwise. 5.2. In view of the above ruling of the jurisdictional High Court, we are of the view that the Department s appeal lacks merit and is therefore dismissed. 6. From the decisions /orders relied upon by the learned advocate, we find that the assertions of the learned advocate to be correct insofar as his contentions that the Revenue has not disputed the eligibility or otherwise of the cenvat credit is concerned. Hence, as held in the case laws relied upon by the learned advocate, Revenue cannot be disputed the eligibility when the refund of the input service credit is claimed. In view of the above, we are of the view tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
