9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and export the same. The appellant availed the benefit of Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007. In accordance with the provision of the above Notification they filed a refund claim for Rs.2,99,875/- on 18.11.2008. The original adjudicating authority sanctioned refund of Rs.82,870/- and had rejected the refund claim amounting to Rs.2,17,005/- on two grounds firstly an amount of Rs.76,701/-, as time barred and secondly an amount of Rs.1,40,304/- as not inadmissible under Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007.The appellant challenged the above order.The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of original adjudicating authority except for the refund related to for the month of March 2008 for which he has remande ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided by CHA in relation to export of goods of the appellant since the export is to Kenya and the refund of such services provided by a technical testing and analysis agency is allowed as per Sl.3 of Notification No. 41/2007.The learned Consultant also submitted that the lower adjudicating authority has not so far decided the case which has been remanded by the Commissioner (Appeals). 5.The Contention of the department is that the period involved in this case is from October, 2007 to March, 2008. The appellant has filed the refund claim on 18th November, 2008. Notification No. 41/2007 dated 06.10.2007 amended by Notification No. 32/2008 would apply in this case vide which six months has been substituted in place of sixty days. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... within six months from the date of last quarter. Undisputedly the refund claim has been for the period from October, 2007 to February 2008 on 18.11.2008 which is beyond six months. Therefore, the same is time barred. Even amending Notification 17/2009 provides for time limit of filing of refund claim within one y ear from the date of export. Firstly the amending Notification was issued after the event of the case and there is no retrospective effect was given to the amending Notification and, therefore, the same is not applicable. As far as the case law cited by the appellant the Hon'ble apex court's decision relates to Section 11A and Rule 173 demand under Section 11A and declaration for classification under Rule 173 of erstwh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of export- 13. Section 65 (105) (h) Services provided by a custom house agent in relation export goods exported by the exporter. Exporter shall produce,- (i) invoice issued by custom house agent for providing services specified in column (3) specifying: (a) number and date of shipping bill, (b) description of export goods, (c) number and date of the invoice issued by the exporter relating to export goods, (d) details of all the charges, whether or not reimbursable, collected by the custom house agent from the exporter in relation to export goods, (ii) details of other taxable services provided by the said custom house agent and received by the exporter, whether or not relatable to export goods. 7.2 So far as the service tax pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
