TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 652X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts available on record clearly established that the claim was not for the period for which the refund was claimed. The goods exported vide the said Shipping bills, were not stored/warehoused during the period of 16.9.2011 to 15.10.2011, and were in fact exported well before that period is a finding of fact, which does not raise any question of law to be considered by the Court - Decided against assessee. - Central Excise Appeal No. - 312 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 11-11-2013 - Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani And Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,JJ. For the Appellant : A. P. Mathur For the Respondent : B. K. Singh Raghuvanshi ORDER 1. We have heard Shri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Shri B.K.S. Raghuvanshi a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod of 16.09.2011 to 15.10.2011) issued by M/s Rishi Shipping, Kutch (Guj) against services of Storage Warehousing availed in respect of goods exported vide Shipping Bill No.5252156 dated 02.09.2011 (Qty of goods involved 330 MT). The LEO was granted by the Customs Officer on said shipping bills on 05.09.2011. Since the goods exported vide the said Shipping were not stored/warehoused in the warehouse during the period of 16.09.2011 to 15.10.2011, as the same were exported well before that period, the issue of availing services of Storage and warehousing as claimed by the respondent is not correct. Thus, the claim of refund of service tax paid on the services of Storage Warehousing availed against the export of goods, vide Shipping Bil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals). The findings recorded by the CESTAT are quoted as below:- "5.After hearing both sides I find that in the refund in question the invoice submitted along with the refund claim was RS/GDN/ST/1783/11-12 dated 17.09.2011 which pertains to period 16.08.2011 to 15.09.2011 whereas Shipping Bill No.4642020 dated 21.07.2011 submitted by them does not cover period of refund. Similarly Shipping Bill dated 02.09.2011 was submitted for invoice RS/GDN/ST/1784/11-12 dated 17.09.2011 pertaining to period 16.09.2011 to 15.10.2011. In view of these facts I do not find any infirmity in the findings of Commissioner (Appeal). Accordingly I uphold order in appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeal) and reject the appeal." 4. Shri A.P. Mathur submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
