TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7-ST. We find that first appellate authority has erroneously recorded the findings on the extending benefit of notification. Provisions of Section 11B Clause (B) (ec) cannot be applied in this case as Section 11B has to be read holistically; which would mean that every refund claim filed has to be considered in terms of provisions and this refund claims of appellant being not in dispute before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its department namely Global Clinical Organisation are engaged in rendering services in relation to clinical trials of newly developed drugs on human participants under the category of Technical Testing Analysis Service to the appellant s affiliate companies located outside India. The said services were rendered by the appellant during the period May 2006 to February 2007. The CERA during the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l on two grounds namely - (i) The refund claims are filed beyond the period of one year from the date of payment. (ii) The exemption for tax on clinical trials was granted under notification No.11/2007-ST which came into effect from 01.03.2007, and the period involved in this case is prior to the issuance of notification. 5. We perused the grounds of appeal. It is the claim of appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd claims, seems to be correct as on perusal of records we find that in the refund claims appellant had not mentioned anything about claiming exemption under Notification 11/2007-ST. We find that first appellate authority has erroneously recorded the findings on the extending benefit of notification. These findings are being extraneous to the issue in hand, in this case, are struck down. 5.3 On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
