TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground that the service provided by the respondents is not clearing and forwarding services in the view of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. CCE 2006 -TMI - 460 - Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. In the light of the decision of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India 1997 (89) ELT 247, held that- the impugned order is set aside and the matter is rem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AT). 2. The contention of the revenue is that the respondents paid the amount of service tax as provider of clearing and forwarding services. The respondents had not challenged the levy. The respondents claimed the refund on the basis of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Larsen Toubro Ltd. (supra), hence, the refund application is not maintainable. It is also pointed out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... person to make a refund claim on the basis of a decision of a Court or Tribunal rendered in the case of another person. He cannot also claim that the decision of the Court/Tribunal in another person's case has led him to discover the mistake of law under which he has paid the tax nor can he claim that he is entitled to prefer a writ petition or to institute a suit within three years of such allege ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. (supra). Taking into facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the matter requires reconsideration by the Commissioner (Appeals) in view of the above decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Hon'ble High Court and the Tribunal. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
