TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellate authority had sufficient material to determine ineligibility for refund at the threshold. The impugned order has not examined the merit of the claim either. It would, therefore, appear that the first appellate authority has travelled beyond jurisdiction to reject the claim for refund. As the fundamental issue of limitation and eligibility have not been considered by the original authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e consideration remitted to the provider but also on the 'tax deducted at source' and paid on behalf of the service provider. On insistence of income tax authorities, the entire tax had been deducted but upon clarification from the Advance Ruling Authority who had held the liability to be limited to 10%, the assessable value was consequently reduced resulting in excess payment of service t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 to evidence that the tax collected in excess had not been passed on to their customer, the Indian Navy. The show cause notice was also limited to that alleged lacuna in the claim for refund. As the original authority had concluded that this was indeed so, he was also statutorily mandated to examine the merits of the claim and issue of limitation before doing s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the merit of the claim either. It would, therefore, appear that the first appellate authority has travelled beyond jurisdiction to reject the claim for refund. This is patently contrary to the law pertaining to refunds and must be set aside. 6. As the fundamental issue of limitation and eligibility have not been considered by the original authority who resorted to the convenient option of alie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
