9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been rejected by the department on the ground that they could not produce original invoices on the strength of which credit was availed. Appellants had taken stand that since the invoices were required under Income-tax Act, they could not file the original invoices with the department. When enquired why invoices could not be produced for verification from the Central Excise authorities, it was accepted that they will now produce the invoices before the concerned authority and get it verified for disposal of pending claims. 3. Regarding denial of service tax refund on the service tax paid on overseas commission, he pointed out that there was requirement in the law that there must be an agreement entered between exporter and the person get ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the proper appreciation of facts as their contract was for continuous supplies and there was overlapping of orders supplied over a time period and should be examined in totality. Counsel also volunteered to submit ledgers and justify the correctness of commission paid, if opportunity to produce records in de novo proceedings was given by the Bench. 5. Third point regarding refund claim of Rs. 47,990/- for non production of certificate as para 2 (i) (F) of Notification No.17/09-ST dated 7.7.2009 relating to services used in goods exported in Appeal No.ST/57837/13, they were ready to produce proof of proper service showing use of those services in the goods exported. 6. Regarding issue of limitation, it was submitted that initially there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notification No.41/07-ST dated 6.10.2007 as amended applicable during the relevant period. Notification specifically provided that claim for refund shall be filed on a quarterly basis, within six months from the end of the relevant quarter during which the said goods have been exported. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld rejection of their refund claims because there were filed under notification No.41/07-ST dated 6.10.2007 holding that the date of export was relevant for determining limitation period for filing refund claims. Ld.Counsel submitted that the legal provisions contained in section 11B must have overriding effect over the notification. 9. On the other hand, ld.DR disagreed with the submissions made by ld.Counsel that provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lear that these records have to be produced before the original adjudicating authority to examine, analyse and finalize their refund claims, he readily agreed for submission of these records before competent authority and requested that ends of justice shall be met if these cases are remanded back to the original adjudicating authority for passing orders afresh after perusal of these records. 14. It is observed that the basic issue relating to non-production of records have also been raised in the Commissioner (Appeals)s order. It is considered essential that the production of relevant records to examine the claim for refund for proper prospective. Accordingly, it is considered necessary to remand the matters back to the original adjudica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
