TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pearance: Ms. Anjali Hirawat, Advocate for the appellant Shri Sanjay Kalra, Authorised Representative for the respondent There are two appeals which are under consideration and they arise out of a common issue. Therefore, they are being considered together for disposal. 2. The appellant, M/s. GL V India Pvt. Ltd., Pune are manufacturers of machinery and are registered with the Central Excise Department. They also provide taxable output services such as consulting engineering service and erection, commissioning and installation service and are registered with the department as a service provider. They made payments of service tax amounting to Rs. 4,08,000/- on 31/12/2005 and Rs. 1,27,500/- on 30/04/2006 towards service tax on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir refund claim to Rs. 5,35,500/- and to reject the refund claim of interest amounting to Rs. 1,40,075/-. The case was adjudicated and an order dated 11/08/2009 was passed by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner whereby he sanctioned a refund of Rs. 5,35,500/- by way of credit in the CENVAT credit account of the appellant and rejected the refund claim of Rs. 1,40,075/-. 2.2. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) praying for sanction of refund in cash and also for sanction of the disallowed refund on account of interest amounting to Rs. 1,40,075/-. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 30/10/2009 upheld the order of the adjudicating authority and rejected the appeal of the appellant. The app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel has also taken the plea that they are entitled to pay the service tax through CENVAT credit account. 4. The learned DR appearing for the Revenue submits that the payment of service tax subsequently in cash by the appellant was without any protest and since there was a delay in payment of service tax, interest of Rs. 1,40,075/- was also required to be paid. Therefore, the appellant cannot turn-around now to say that they are entitled for making the payment of the service tax through the CENVAT credit account. The learned DR further submits that the appellant was not entitled for suo motu recredit of the CENVAT credit wrongly availed. 5. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. 6. In the instant case the appellant-a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
