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

2024 (7) TMI 1257

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d to be barred by limitation merely because certain documents have not been appended, more so, for the reasons beyond their control. It is opined that filing of the initial refund claim, substantially complying to the provisions of law and placing on record their claim before the Department, is in time; therefore, it is found that in the instant case, the refund claims are not barred by limitation. Whether the services provided by the appellant fall under Intermediary Services ? - HELD THAT:- The learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has not given any findings on the issue; he has simply remanded the case back to the original authority with a direction to give findings on the issue despite the fact that the original authority .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2012-CE dated 18.06.2012; a Show Cause Notice dated 05.12.2018 was issued to the appellants seeking to reject the refund claims; the Original Authority vide Order dated 22.10.2019 rejected the refund claims for a total of Rs.16,49,23,648/- on the grounds that the refund claims are time barred and that the appellants are not entitled to refund of CENVAT credit as they have provided only intermediary services; on an appeal preferred by the appellant, Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 19.03.2020 held that the refund claims filed by the appellant are not barred by limitation; however, Commissioner (Appeals) has remanded the case back to the Original Authority for giving findings on whether the appellants provided intermediary ser .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndia 2013 (293) E.L.T. 641 (Bom.) Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd. versus Union of India 2016 (341) E.L.T. 44 (All.) M/s Heg Limited verus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Bhopal 2019 (29) G.S.T.L. 730 (Tri. -Del.) Suzuki Motorcycle (1) Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE, Delhi-Ill, Gurgaon 2018 (2) TMI 133-CESTAT Chandigarh Balmer Lawrie Co. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Kolkata-VI 2015 (315) E.L.T. 100 (Tri. -Kolkata) M/s Coginzant Technology Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, Chennai 2021 (10) TMI 642 Banswara Syntex Ltd. versus Union of India 2017 (349) E.L.T. 90 (Raj.) Shasun Pharmaceuticals Ltd. versus Joint Secretary, M.F. (D.R.), New Delhi 2013 (291) E.L.T. 189 (Mad.) 3. Learned C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt case are as to whether the applications for refund filed by the appellants are barred by limitation under Notification No.27/2012 and as to whether the appellants were supplying merely Intermediary Services and thus, are not eligible for refund claims. We find that the appellants have filed the refund claims in time; however, they did not enclose the BRC certificates; the reasons submitted for not filing the BRC certificates are set to be the delay on the part of the DGFT Authorities to show the BRC certificates on their Website. It is not the case of the Department that the appellants have submitted the refund claims in a delayed manner; the only case of the Department is that BRCs are not submitted. We find that BRCs are required to sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an be filed by placing relevant documents along with it, as such, the provision is not conveying the simple meaning, as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents want to put forth. 6. Coming to the issue whether the services provided by the appellant fall under Intermediary Services , we find that learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has not given any findings on the issue; he has simply remanded the case back to the original authority with a direction to give findings on the issue despite the fact that the original authority has given elaborate findings on the issue. We are of the considered opinion that by doing so, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has deprived this Bench of an opportunity to analyse the legalit .....

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