9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of separately in this order on the factual matrix. 4. The appellant herein is an SEZ unit; took service tax registration as non-assessee category for claiming exemption from payment of service tax (by way of refund) on various taxable services received by them in relation to authorized operations in SEZ in terms of Notification No.40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. Appellant preferred refund claims before the lower authorities. The said refund claims were partly allowed and partly rejected. It is on record that appellant had list of services approved by Ministry of Commerce and Industry for authorized operations in SEZ unit. 5. In Appeal No.ST/30349/2018, the adjudicating authority as well as the first appellate authority has in respect of refu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is the claim of the learned counsel that the dispute is regarding only the documents filed in support of the online refund claims filed by the appellant. It is his submission that the payments to service providers were made on various dates in the period spread between April, 2012 to June, 2013 and the delay in filing the refund claims was spread from 0 months to 13 months. It is his submission that though adjudicating authority has condoned the delay up to 3 months, during the relevant period the refund claims were to be supported by proof of payment of service tax by the service providers to the Government of India which took time. It was submitted that this explanation was not acceptable by the adjudicating authority and also due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctual matrix in a broader perspective, wherein the delay has been sought to be explained. In my view, the impugned order and the adjudication order for rejection of refund claims of Rs. 13,75,625/- needs reconsideration by the adjudicating authority looking at the circumstances at which appellant had to file the refund claims belatedly. Appellant also needs to file appropriate chart as to how the delay had occurred and give a justification. Accordingly, the appeal in respect of refund claim of Rs. 13,75,625/- is disposed of by way of remand to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh after considering the prayer for condonation of delay in its correct perspective. Needless to state, the adjudicating authority shall follow t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
