9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 469X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for refund of service tax of Rs.5,94,919/- with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, claiming that they were providing services which were no more taxable as per exemption Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 and therefore the said amount deposited by them with the exchequer on 05.10.2012 may be refunded. Along with the said application they filed copy of the challan through which service tax was deposited, quarterly return for the period ending September 2012. Through order-in-original dated 24.04.2015, the original authority held that the appellant was not eligible for the said exemption and the refund was hit by doctrine of unjust enrichment. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o service tax was collected from the service recipient. He has further relied on this Tribunal's decision in the case of Accounts Hub Pvt. Ltd. decided through final order No. A/85378/2023 dated 13.03.2023 and submitted that this Tribunal has held that service tax paid under the provisions of sub-rule (1A) of Rule 6 of Service Tax Rules, 1994 would be at par with the amounts lying in account current which is popularly known as PLA and can be withdrawn by the depositor any time. 3. Heard the learned AR who has stated that though the services were exempted, the service tax component was recovered by the appellant and therefore, as provided under Section 73A of Finance Act, 1994, the appellant has to deposit the said amount with the exchequer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d amount of Rs.5,34,693/- was paid as advance under sub-rule (1A) of Rule 6 of Service Tax Rules and therefore by applying the precedent decision of this Tribunal in the case of Accounts Hub Pvt. Ltd. decided through final order No. A/85378/2023 dated 13.03.2023, we hold that the appellant was eligible for the said refund. We also observe that since the amount sought for refund was advance paid as per the said subrule, the question of unjust enrichment does not arise. We therefore allow the appeal after setting aside the impugned order and direct the original authority to issue the refund cheque to the appellant within a period of four weeks from the date of service of copy of this order on him. 5. In above terms, appeal is allowed. ( Ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
