9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quashing the show cause notices, dated l5-12-1999. (ii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant refunds of Rs. 10,40,938/- and Rs. 9,38,771/- forthwith along with interest upto date at the rate of 18% per annum. 2. The peritioner's case is that by the Finance Act, 1994 a tax known as service tax was leviable and by the Service Tax (Eighth Amendment) Rules, 1997 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posited by the petitioners before the Supreme Court who were customers or clients of the Clearing and Forwarding Agents or of the Goods Transport Operators were ordered to be refunded within 12 weeks on their making a demand for refund. In pursuance of the aforesaid Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner has preferred claims for refund of the aforesaid amounts. The Assistant C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise Act, 1944." 3. A counter affidavit has been filed in which the aforesaid assertion that was made in the show cause notice has not been repealed. We have gone through the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in MafatLal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) and we find that the judgment cannot be read to mean that the appropriate authority under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en to the Forwarding and Clearing Agents or to the Transporters or to the Customers, these are the questions of fact which the authorities concerned have to examine before deciding whether the amounts should be refunded or not. Therefore, at this stage, the writ petition cannot be entertained. 5. In view of the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed. It is, however, desired ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
