Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (12) TMI 1192

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... they immediately, vide letter dated 16/06/2017, intimated the said mistake / discrepancy to the authority before whom the refund claim was filed by them and requested the said authority to accept the duly corrected/ rectified ST-3 returns manually for the period April, 2016 to September, 2016 but the said authority vide letter dated 16/06/2017 turned down the said request and rejected the refund claim merely on the basis of non-disclosing the availment of credit in ST-3 returns. Learned Commissioner also followed the same without applying his independent mind to the issue and without looking into the settled legal position as laid down by this Tribunal in number of decisions. In the instant matter, the mistake committed by the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e filing of instant appeal are stated as follows. The appellant are holding Service Tax registration under the category Market Research Agency Services . On 30/03/2017 they filed a refund claim amounting to Rs.13,31,503/- under Rule(5)ibid r/w Notification No. 27/2012 which was accumulated during the period from April, 2016 to June, 2016. Subsequent to filing of refund claims, the appellants realized their mistake in ST-3 return filed for the period April, 2016 to September, 2016, wherein they had inadvertedly failed to disclose the amount of credit availed by them. Accordingly, vide letter dated 15/06/2017 they intimated the said discrepancy to the concerned Assistant Commissioner before whom the refund claim was filed with a request to a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ank Ltd. v/s Commissioner; 2017 (50) STR 110 (Tri-All.) (iv) VOSS Exotech Automotives Pvt. Ltd. v/s Commissioner; 2018 (363) ELT 1141-(Tri-Bom.) (v) Mccormick Support Services Pvt. Ltd v/s CCE ST 2018 (364) ELT 985 (Tri-Chan.) Per contra Learned Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of Revenue re-iterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and placed reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the matter of Everyday Health (India) Pvt. Ltd. v/s Commissioner, CGST Central Excise, Mumbai (East); 2019 (370) ELT 846 (Tri- Mum.). 5. I have heard Learned Counsel for the appellant and Learned Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of Revenue and perused the case records including the case laws submitte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rised Representative in the matter of M/s. Everyday Health (supra) is somehow similar with the facts of the present case in which this Tribunal after setting aside the impugned order therein remanded the matter back to the Original Authority for deciding the issue afresh in line with the observations made in the said order. The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid order are reproduced hereunder :- xxx xxx xxx 5. Heard both sides and perused the case records. 6. The fact is not under dispute that the appellant is a service provider and provided the entire output service to the overseas entities. Thus, the accumulated Cenvat credit balance available in the books should be available to the appellant as refund under Rule 5 of the Cenv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the same were not accepted by the authority below. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, I am of the considered view that justice demands that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remanded to the Original Authority for deciding the issued afresh after verification of ST-3 returns filed by the appellant manually. 6. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the matter is remanded to the Original Authority in order to decide the issue afresh in accordance with the observation made hereinabove. It is needless to mention that while deciding the matter the authority concerned shall follow the principle of natural justice and grant proper opportunity of hearing to the appellant. (Pronounced in open Court on 22.12.2022) - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates