TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants in the case of MEGMA DESIGN AUTOMATION INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, BANGALORE [ 2015 (9) TMI 939 - CESTAT BANGALORE] - The assessing officer did not have any valid ground for rejecting the refund claims of ₹ 5,77,073/- and ₹ 2,03,935/- respectively, for which the assessee is legally entitled to. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15,64,887/- for the period July, 2014 to September, 2014 and ₹ 12,95,324/- for the period January, 2013 to March, 2013 in terms of Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18/06/2012. 2. After issuing show cause notices to the assessee, the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax North Division, Kolkata had disallowed the refund cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd claim of unutilised CENVAT Credit on the grounds:- (i) That the appellant did not submit the original copies of invoices and therefore, the CENVAT Credit amounting to ₹ 4,15,205/- and ₹ 1,35,001/- respectively was disallowed taking the plea that the CENVAT Credit cannot be availed on the basis of photocopies of invoices. (ii) The assessing officer had disa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of hearing, so disallowance of ₹ 4,15,205/- and ₹ 91,501/- was unjust in facts and circumstances of the case. It was further argued that assessing officer had committed an error when he disallowed the refund claim in respect of reverse charges payments because all challans were duly submitted by the assessee before the adjudicating authority. It is also argue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orders of the Lower Authorities. 5. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 6. I find force in the arguments advanced by the counsel for the assessee and I also find that the present appeals are squarely covered by the decisions as relied upon by the appellants. The assessing officer did not have any valid ground for rejecting the refund claims of ₹ 5,77,07 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
