TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subject to satisfaction of other conditions stipulated in the Notification - appellant is eligible for refund. Technical Testing and Analysis Services - denial on the ground that the services are not specified services for allowing refund of Service Tax - Held that: - There is no dispute that "Technical Testing and Analysis Services" are one of the specified services under the Notification 17/2009. Since, it is has been collected under the sub heading and there is no dispute on that score. I find no justification to deny the refund of said Service Tax. Loading and unloading services - wharfage charges - Held that: - It is evident that both services have been rendered within the port. These have also been paid by service provider duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted. Ld. Counsel submits that the claim has been filed within a period of 1 year from the end of the quarter in which export has taken place. Hence, it is to be considered as filed within time, in terms of the new notification. He lays reliance on the case laws reported as Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune Vs. Chandrashekhar Exports as well as Addi Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus C. Ex., Noida 2014 (36) S.T.R. 65 (Tri.- Del) and submitted that in the above cases refund has been permitted by taking the view that the claim can be filed within 1 year as permitted by the new Notification. 4. Certain amounts have been disallowed from the refund under Technical Testing and Analysis Services, loading and unloading as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidered as filed within time which has already been clarified by CBEC vide their Circular dated 12.03.2009. 6. Out of the total claim of ₹ 16, 10,443/- for which refund claim was filed by the appellant under Notification 70/2009-ST dated 07.07.2009, an amount of ₹ 2,06,794/- has been disallowed, On the ground of delay of filing of such refund claims, the time limit of 6 months under Notification 41/2007, which was subsequently increased to 1 year in the succeeding Notification 17/2009. CBEC Circular dated 12.03.2009 has already clarified that so long as the refund claims are filed within the extended period of time provided by new Notification, the assessee would be eligible for the benefit of refund/ subject to satisfaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unloading services as well as wharfage charges for which Service Tax refund has been denied. The claim of the appellant is that both these charges have been paid by M/s Rishi shipping for work carried out within the Kandla Port. It is also not disputed that M/s. Rishi Shipping, who paid the Service Tax is duly authorized by Kandla Port Trust for rendering such services. It is the submission of the appellant that such services should be considered as port services, which is specified under the Notification. I find no justification for rejecting the refund of these two components. It is evident that both services have been rendered within the port. These have also been paid by service provider duly authorized by the port. As such, these ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
