TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 728X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e received in the month of March 2010. It is the findings, that once the amount has been paid in January 2010, the appellant should have been filed the refund claim within 6 months from that date. I find that both the lower authorities have misconstrued the entire issue. On perusal of the debit note raised by M/s. Sri Ganesh Forwarders Pvt. Ltd., CHA, on the appellant, I find that the debit note i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 59/2011 dt. 21/11/2011. 2. The issue involved in this appeal is regarding rejection of refund claim of Rs.31,302/- paid under the category of port services by the CHA and for the service rendered like shipment of various consignments in Mangalore Port. 3. Both the lower authorities have rejected the refund claim filed on the ground that the appellant herein had paid an amount to the CHA in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be filed within 6 months as mentioned in Notification No.9/2009-ST. 6. I have considered the submissions from both sides and perused the records. The issue to be decided in this case is whether the refund application filed by the appellant is within time or is beyond the time limitation as provider under clause 2(e) of Notification No.9/2009-ST. 7. It is undisputed in this case that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ically talks about discharge of service tax liability of Rs.31,303/- on the wharfage for an export done by them on behalf of the appellant on 04/03/2010. If the export of the consignment is done in the month of March 2010 and the invoice/debit note specifically records the same, in my opinion, the refund application filed by the appellant on 30/08/2010 is within the period as mentioned in Notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
