TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 766X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and was reduced by the appellant to ₹ 94,348/-, by withdrawing the excess claim of ₹ 1,19,807/-. The appellant contention that the said claim was withdrawn under the Jurisdictional Superintendent, and Service Tax authorities have to adjudicate the full claim, may be true but cannot be appreciated inasmuch as the appellants never revised their claim subsequently. As such, the original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd of Service Tax paid on various services used by them for export, in terms of notification No. 41/2007- ST to the extent of ₹ 2,14,156/-. The said refund application was filed on 14.9.2009. 2.Thereafter, vide letter dated 22.12.2009 addressed by the appellant to their jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner of Service Tax, they withdraw their excess claim of ₹ 1,19,807/- and requested ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present appeal. 6. After carefully considering the submissions made by both the sides and after examining relevant letter dated 22.12.09 addressed by the appellant to their jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner, It is clear that refund claim was originally filed to the extent of ₹ 2,14,155/- and was reduced by the appellant to ₹ 94,348/-, by withdrawing the excess claim of ₹ 1, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
