2017 (4) TMI 698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A.B. Kulgod, Asst. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. P-I/MMD/ 240/2012, dated 19-12-2012. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding refund of the amount of service tax paid to the service provider of the appellant. These services are used by appellant for providing output s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rvice provider. Coming to such conclusion, the refund claim was partly allowed. Appellant is aggrieved by the rejection of the refund amount by the lower authorities. 3.1 Appellant produces before me a statement which was produced before the lower authorities along with the bank statement. On perusal of a random transaction, it is noticed that in respect of services rendered by Tata Teleserv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... authorities have erred in coming to a conclusion that the refund claim filed by the appellant is not co-relatable with the input services and exports. In view of the foregoing, as I find that there is a co-relation with payment made to service provider and also that claim is within one year of the payment made to the service provider, appellant is eligible for refund of the amount. In view of abov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X