TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. All the input services except fleet management services/rent-a-cab services were held to be eligible for refund in the appellant’s own case [2016 (11) TMI 1352 - CESTAT HYDERABAD] - the appellant is eligible for refund in respect of all services except rent-a-cab service - appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - ST/20878/2014, ST/21784/2014 - Final Order No. 30476-77/2017 - Dated:- 24-3-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, Member(Judicial) Shri G. Prahlad, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri Arun Kumar, Deputy Commissioner(AR) for the Respondent. ORDER The appellants are engaged in the business of providing contract research and development support to the drug and pharmaceutical industry and offers complete c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... losed) FIRC not submitted as per OIO (FIRC details enclosed) SCN No. SCN C.No. IV/16/1790/2013 S. Tax dated 21.08.2013 SCN No. IV/16/2781/2013-S. Tax dated 25.10.2013 Period involved July 2012 to September 2012 October 2012 to December 2012 Amount rejected by Ld. Commissioner (A) ₹ 40,27,987/- ₹ 25,92,687/- Services involved a. Business Auxiliary services b. Courier Services. c. Fleet management services d. Technical testing analysis e. Management Consultancy f. Manpower supply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ides. The main contention put forward by the department was that appellant has not furnished the BRC. FIRC statement has already been submitted by the appellant at the time of refund claim. The Bench had directed the appellant to furnish BRC and the appellant had accordingly furnished the same on 20.01.2017. The same was furnished to the department for verification and thereafter case has been taken up for hearing today. The appellant has complied with the procedural requirement mandated by notification No. 27/2012. All the input services except fleet management services/rent-a-cab services were held to be eligible for refund in the appellant s own case vide Final Order stated supra. Following the same, I hold that the appellant is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
