2008 (4) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... received by them, it is an input cost - C.A.’s certificate proves that benefit of service tax had not been passed on - no change in the price in the appellant’s goods after paying tax – refund admissible on merits & on limitation - ST/193/2007 - A/849/2008-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 30-4-2008 - Shri B. S.V. Murthy, Member (T) Shri P.M. Dave, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Sameer Chitkara, SD .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re-submitted the refund application with original copies of challans, bills of transport agencies etc. 8-7-2006 The appellant submitted further documents before the Assistant Commissioner. 4-9-2006 A show cause notice was issued to the appellant proposing to reject the refund claim on the ground of time-bar. 16-11-2006 The Assistant Commissioner passed OIO N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 23-9-2007 The appellant filed written submissions in the appeal filed by the Department before the Commissioner (Appeals). * The appeal of the Revenue was not maintainable because OIO No. ST/04/2006-07 was no longer in existence when the appeal was filed by the Revenue as the said order of the Assistant Commissioner has got merged with OIA No. 8/2007 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals)." 2. The appellants contest the findings of the Commissioner that doctrine of merger is not applicable and the order passed by him on the appeal by them earlier should be treated as final. Further, the appellants also contend that they are eligible for refund. The learned Advocate for the appellants has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, appellants will not be able to prove that they have not passed on the burden by other method. Further, the learned Advocate has also cited the following case in support of his contention: (a) 2000 (126) E.L.T. 1014 - Hero Honda Motors Ltd. (b) 2003 (161) E.L.T. 452 - Commissioner v. Sethia Audio Video Pvt. Ltd. (c) 2007 (8) S.T.R. 111 = 2006 (196) E.L.T. 61 - Bridavan Tex Proces .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X