9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 776X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to foreign network operator by way of providing international roaming facility to the subscriber of the foreign network during the visit to India. The said service was exempted vide Notification No.36/2007-ST dated 15.6.2007 retrospectively from 1.7.1994 to till 14.1.2007. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of the adjudicating authority rejecting refund claim on the ground that the documents had not been produced to show that the amount charged to the foreign network operator was as per agreement and also to show that no service tax was charged. According to the Commissioner (Appeals), the adjudicating authority had rejected the refund claim on the basis that the appellant failed to provide the details of payment of service tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant has failed to provide the details of payment of service tax on the services provided to international inbound roamers. Learned Counsel stated that above letter of Superintendent has not been supplied to them. She argued that the allegation in the show cause notice was based on unjust enrichment whereas the findings of the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) are based on failure to provide certain details. 5. Learned AR for the department reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 6. We have considered the submissions of both sides. 7. At the outset, we find that the Tribunal in the case of Vodafone Cellular Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune-III-2014 (34) STR 890 (Tri.-Mum.) has held that the principle of unjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the particular month but no documents have been provided in support of their contention that the amount charged as per the agreement with the foreign mobile operators and that Service Tax was not charged in the invoices. Though the noticee in their dated 28.6.2007 have claimed that they have neither collected Service Tax from the service recipient nor passed on the burden of incidence of Service Tax to any person, yet all the documents submitted by them are silent to this effect." 8. We find that the principle of unjust enrichment would not be apply in this case. Export of service being exempted under Notification No.36/2007-ST dated 15.6.2007, the only issue that remained for verification of quantum of refund to be sanctioned. We remand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
