9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -in-appeal No. PIII/VM/322/2010 dated 1/12/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-III), Pune, wherein the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has set aside the order-in-original NO. R-41/2010-11 dated 14/6/2010 and allowed the appeal of the respondent. The issue involved is that the respondent filed refund application dated 1/4/2010 for Rs. 4,16,024/-under the provision of Notification N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim beyond the stipulated time limit. He therefore prays for allowing the appeal of the Revenue. 3. None appeared for the respondent. It is noticed that this matter has come up for hearing earlier on various dates on 21/3/2014, 7/5/2014, 6/6/2014, 11/7/2014, 30/8/2014 and 24/9/2014 but there is no representation from the respondent side. Therefore I proceed to decide the matter on merit. 4. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied services. Here I find that it is not denied that service tax has been paid. It is also not denied that export has been place. Though commission agents services have not been specified in the Notification No. 17/2009 as an eligible service for getting the benefit of refund, the fact is that the tax is paid and the same has not been denied. Further, I find that in the instant case the claim pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, the said Circular lays down three basic conditions. They are i) so far the nature of the service which has been received by the exporter can be ascertained ii) tax paid therein is clearly mentioned and iii) other detail as required under Rule 4(a) are mentioned the refund should be allowed if the input service has a nexus with the service/goods exported as discussed earlier. I find that the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has relied upon the Board Circular No. 1320/01/2010 ST dated 19-01-2010, which is squarely applicable in the present case. 5.1 As per the said Circular refund otherwise admissible under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There is no dispute regarding nexus between services and export made by respondent. I therefore do not find any infirmity in the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
