Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2021 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 1393 - CESTAT AHMEDABADRefund claim of service tax paid due to wrong calculation of value - rejection also on the ground that the appellant’s payment of service tax is advance payment in terms of Rule 6(1A) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 which is required to be adjusted for the future payment - rejection also on the ground of unjust enrichment. HELD THAT:- There is no charge in the show cause notice for denial of refund on this ground. Secondly, even if Rule 6(1A) is referred, it is found that appellant have clearly made the service tax payment in respect of an invoice of Bombardier Transportation Sweden. Therefore, it is an actual payment of service tax which falls under Rule 6(2) and does not fall under Rule 6(1A) as deposit. Therefore, on both the count the refund was wrongly rejected. Principles of Unjust enrichment - HELD THAT:- On the perusal of the balance sheet, it is satisfied that the amount of refund is clearly shown under the head of Loan & Advances. Therefore, the appellant has established that the incidence of amount of refund has not been passed on. On both the grounds the Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly rejected the refund claim - the impugned order is set aside - Appeal allowed.
|