TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directly in the Supreme Court - the Court answers the above question in the affirmative by holding that the CESTAT erred in upholding the denial of refund claim by the Appellant for the period 16th October, 1998 to 1st September, 1999 in respect of service tax paid by it on the clearing and forwarding services availed by it - refund allowed. - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - SERTA 1/2017 - - - Dated:- 8-5-2017 - S. MURALIDHAR ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA JJ. Appellant Through: Mr. M.P. Devnath, Mr. Abhishek Anand Mr. Yogendra Aldak, Advocates. Respondent Through: Mr. Deepak Anand, Junior Standing Counsel. O R D E R Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: 1. This is an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d during the period 16th July, 1997 to 30th September, 1999. 4. However, by the order dated 24th January, 2000, the Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim on account of unjust enrichment. The amount was asked to be transferred to the Government welfare fund. 5. While the Appellant s appeal was pending before the Commissioner (Appeals), by the Finance Act with effect from 13th May, 2000 a retrospective amendment was made to the FA, 1994 to overcome the effect of the decision of the Supreme Court in Laghu Udyog Bharti (supra). 6. In view of the retrospective amendments, the Commissioner (Appeals) by an order dated 12th October 2000, dismissed the Petitioner s appeal confirming the order rejecting the refund claim. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of service tax would be only in respect of services rendered by goods transport operators between the period from 16 th November, 1997 to 2 nd June, 1998. Similarly, there can be no tax liability on users of the services of the clearing and forwarding agents beyond 1.9.1999 when by notification No.7/99 dated 23.8.99, the levy of service tax on the services provided by clearing and forwarding agents were exempted. Furthermore the liability to pay interest or penalty on outstanding amounts will arise only if the dues are not paid within the period of two weeks from the order passed by this Court on 17thNovember, 2003. In those cases in which the tax may have been paid but not refunded to the writ petitioners, for whatever reason, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 3rd February 2006, there can be no manner of doubt that the Appellant would be entitled to refund of the service tax for the period beyond 16th October, 1998. Since there is no ambiguity in the order of the Supreme Court and the Union of India has not sought any further clarification, the law as explained by the Supreme Court in its judgment dated 17th March, 2005 read with its order dated 3rd February 2006 has to be strictly applied. 14. It was submitted that the Appellant ought to have appealed against the dismissal of its appeal and not straightway approached this Court with the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is seen that the Petitioner was before the Supreme Court with its petition under Article 32 of the Consti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
