9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1677X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd both the sides. 2. This is an appeal filed against order in appeal No.OIA-AHM-EXCUS-002-APP-118-17-18 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Ahmedabad. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant had filed a refund claim under Sec. 102(2) of Finance Act, 2016 on 27.10.2016 for an amount of Rs. 42,39,861/- being service tax paid during the period 01.04.2015 to 29 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lic authorities during the period i.e. 01.04.2015 to 29.02.2016, were allowed to be refunded, hence, the mode/payment of service tax, during the relevant period, becomes irrelevant. It is his contention that under sec. 102(2) of the Finance Act nowhere it is stipulated that the amount paid by utilizing through cash only would be refunded and Cenvat credit used in discharging service tax during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 102(2) of the Finance Act, 2016. Even though the authorities below had not rejected the refund on merit but a portion of the refund amount was disallowed on the ground that while discharging their service tax liability during the relevant period, the amount of Rs. 18,25,194/- has been paid from their Cenvat credit account and refund of said Cenvat credit account would result into double benefit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
