TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lled by the respondent, and thus, refund was allowed. The time limit prescribed in notification issued from time to time is to supplement the provision of mere act and hold that as the appellant has complied with condition of the notification. Therefore, merely on the ground of limitation refund cannot be rejected - appellant is entitled for refund claim - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. ST/512,513/2011-ST(SM) - -FINAL ORDER NO. 55876-55877/2016-ST(SM) - Dated:- 13-12-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Shri Vaibhav Narang, Advocate for the Applicants Shri Dharam Singh, DR for the Respondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal Appellant have filed this appeal against the impugned orders rej ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of CCE Pune Vs. Chandrashekhar Exports (Supra) wherein this Tribunal observed as under: 6. On consideration of submissions made by both sides, we find that there is no dispute as to the fact that the appellant had exported the goods and had utilized the services of the service provider for such exports. It is also not in dispute that appellant is eligible for the refund of the amount of service tax paid by the service providers. The dispute is regarding whether the appellant can get the refund of the amount having filed the refund claim on 31.03.2009 instead of 30.09.2008. We find that the first appellate authority has correctly recorded the fact that it is settled principle as to Rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the procedures are satisfied. This Tribunal in the case of Sandoz Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has also held the same view. Further, the C.B.E. C. in Circular dated 12-3-2009 cited supra, have also held that the so long as the refund claims is filed within the extended period of time provided for in the Notification, the assessee would be eligible for the benefit of refund, subject to satisfaction of other conditions stipulated in the Notification. 6. Following the above decisions, I hold that, in the present case also, the appellant is eligible for the benefit of refund claim filed under Notification No. 41/2007 as amended by Notification No. 17/2007 and the time bar aspect is not attracted. However, the appellant has to satisfy that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
