TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess service tax has been paid and the same has not been collected and after going through the general ledger account and other relevant documents, ST-3 returns and TR6 challans, he has recorded a finding that there was no unjust enrichment. He has also recorded that excess payments were reflected as receipts in the general ledger account and there was no corresponding debit entries in the name of any of their customers. Therefore, the incidence of tax was not passed on to any other person. Procedure adopted by the original adjudicating authority while adjudicating the second show-cause notice cannot be found fault with, even though it may not be appropriate to take it as a basis for coming to the conclusion in favour of the appellant but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revision of the order on the ground that the refund claim was hit by unjust enrichment clause and the appellant was required to show that there is no unjust enrichment. The appellant before the Commissioner submitted that what had happened was a clerical error and no excess amount of service tax was collected but only excess amount was paid and further produced Chartered Accountant’s certificate. However, the Commissioner took a view that the certificate of Chartered Accountant was not sufficient to show that there was no unjust enrichment and accordingly denied the eligibility for refund and demanded the amount already sanctioned. The appellant is in appeal against this order dt. 30/11/2010. 2. In the meanwhile, the original adjudicating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the demand for refund already sanctioned without waiting for the matter to attain finality before the Tribunal on the order passed by the Commissioner and without ascertaining whether that order has been challenged or not which should not have been done. The result is parallel litigation on the same issue and contemporary orders by two officers of the Department contradicting to each other which does not speak well of the supervision/control/management in the Department. 4. In any case, it is not the job of the Tribunal to look into such problems. 5. However, since the order of the original authority passed on 31/03/2011 has been placed before me, it would be worthwhile taking note as to how the Deputy Commissioner proceeded to pass an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
