9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007, specified services as detailed in the notification, received and used by the exporter of goods are exempted from the whole of the service tax under Section 66 and 66A of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, the exporter shall claim exemption by way of refund of service tax already paid on the aforesaid specified services, on the basis of the conditions mentioned under Notification No. 41/2007 (supra), superseded vide notification No. 17/2009 dated 07.07.2009. In view of the above notification, the appellant company had filed refund claim of service tax paid on services such as Custom house Agents, Port Services, Courier Charges, Bank Charges etc., received and used by them for the export of the goods manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal documents was owing to the reason that their head office is located at Jaipur. Hence the delay. However, he submitted that the claim was filed by them on 07.01.2011, which is well within the period of limitation. Hence, the original date of submission of the refund claim should be taken into consideration for determining the time limit and the date of re-submission cannot be construed as the date of filing of the refund claim for the stipulated period of one year. He relied on the following case laws:- - CCE, Delhi Vs. M/s. Arya Exports and Industries 2005 (192) ELT 89 (Del.) - Rubberwood India (P) Ltd. Vs. CC, Cochin 2006 (206) ELT 536 (Tri.-Bang.) 5. The Ld. AR, Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC, submitted that the appellants did not file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted on 02.05.2011 and finally on pointing out the defects, the same was rectified and the original documents were submitted on 04.11.2011. The Tribunal in the case of Rubberwood India (P) Ltd. Vs. CC, Cochin (supra) has held that the date of limitation should be taken from the original date of filing of refund claim. Further, I find from the records that there has been an amendment under Section 11 B w.e.f. 26.05.1995, which stipulates that the date of filing the refund claim is the date on which claim was filed initially. Further, on going through the decision in the case of Peria Karamalai Tea and Produce Co. Ltd. (supra), which has been cited by the Commissioner (appeals) in his OIO, I find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court Bench co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
