9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 722X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any service tax to the service providers. The said refund claims were sought to be rejected by show-cause notice dated 18.08.2010. The appellant replied to the show-cause notice contesting the issue on merits. In the first round of litigation, Adjudicating Authority rejected the refund claims and the matter was carried to 1st Appellate Authority who by order dated 29.03.2012 remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to examine the documents furnished by the appellant and consider the appellant's eligibility for refund claim afresh. I find that the Adjudicating Authority in order-in-original 1/2013 dated 10.01.2013 religiously records the findings/directions of the 1st Appellate Authority and reproduces the entire order of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefits of SEZ Notification is also not applicable for the assesses for the refund period. Since the assessee are SEZ unit, they should have filed the refund application under the applicable Notification No. 09/2009-ST.,dated 03.03.2009 as amended vide Notification No. 15/2009-ST dated 20.05.2009. But the assesses have filed refund application under Notification 5/2006-CE(NT) dated 14.03.2006. Therefore their refund application merits rejection" As against these findings an appeal was preferred before the 1st Appellate Authority and the 1st Appellate Authority in the impugned order has upheld the order-in-original by recording the following finding. "The appellant contested that the objection is not relevant for this hearing and also t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice sought explanation from the appellant as to why the refund claim should not be rejected only on the ground that the appellant had not used the input services for rendering output services and the input services are not directly used for providing output services as also the date from when the foreign inward remittances certificates were issued stating the date to be considered for refund claim and hence to be rejected on the limitation. It can be noticed from the findings recorded by the lower authorities, as reproduced herein above, that both the lower authorities have gone beyond the allegations made in the show-cause notice and decided the matter on a different ground which was not put across to the appellant. It is settled law that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
