TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 678X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Court decision in the case of Mportal India Wireless Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs CST Bangalore [2011 (9) TMI 450 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], therefore, no merits found in the objection raised by the Revenue. Refund of Cenvat credit - Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules - Certain services do not have nexus with the output services - Appellant contended that almost 24 services were involved and the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing registered with the Revenue is not available to the department, the same would not be considered as a bar for examining the assessee's refund claim. - Appeals disposed of - ST/1944/2011-DB, ST/2001/2011-DB, ST/2137/2011-DB, ST/2138/2011-DB - Final Order No. 20275-20278/2016 - Dated:- 18-2-2016 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member and Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member For the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed refund in respect of certain services by holding that they have direct nexus with the out-put services but has rejected the refund claim in respect of others by observing that they do not have any nexus. 3. As regards the registration issu, we find that said issue is no more res integra and stands settled by the Honble Karnataka High Courts decision in the case of Mportal India Wirele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.R. also submits that the appellants have not shown that they were not in a position to use the accumulated CENVAT credit. 7. As against the above, learned advocate submits that they are 100% EOU and as such they are within their rights to claim the refund in terms of the provisions of Rule 5. 8. Without examining as to whether the Commissioner (Appeals) has power to remand or not, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
