2002 (9) TMI 1

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dated 26-9-2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants filed claim for the refund of the service tax paid by them of Rs. 1,66,352/-. They based their claim for the refund on the basis of Apex Court judgment in the case of M/s. Laghu Udyog Bharati v. U.O.I. dated 27-7-1999 [1999 (112) E.L.T. 365 (S.C.)] vide which the provisions of Rule 2(d)(xii .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... before us by the learned JDR that the Commissioner (Appeals) could not dismiss the appeals as infructuous. He should have decided the case on merits and dismiss the refund claim holding that the same was not maintainable in view of Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act vide which Rule 2 which was earlier quashed by the Apex Court, of, the Service Tax Rules, had been revalidated with retrospecti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X