9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed against order in appeal No. 103/2011(STC)/ K.Anpazhakan/Commr(A)/Ahd dated 28.4.2011. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant is holding Service Tax registration and also registered with the office of Kandla Special Economic Zone (KASEZ for short). Appellant filed a refund claim on 21.09.2010 for Rs. 47,858/- in terms of the Notification No. 15/2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. 3. Aggrieved by such order in original, appellant preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. First appellate authority also relied upon the findings of the adjudicating authority and rejected the appeal filed. 4. Shri Harsh J. Adhyaru, appeared on behalf of the appellant as authorised by the Company Secretary of the appellant M/s. Intas Pharma Limited. He would su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the lower authority. 6. On perusal of the record, I find that the adjudicating authority as well as the first appellate authority has not considered the representation made by the appellant along with the reply to the show cause notice. The said letter specifically states that due to the distance between their head office and the factory premises, this information was not captured i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order and remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh in the light of the allegations made in the show cause notice, replies made by the appellant and also to consider the application for condonation of delay in filing the refund claim, which is submitted along with the reply to the show cause notice. Needless to state that adjudicating authority shall follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
