9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsp; The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules and Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 07.07.2009 for refund of service tax paid on the services namely Business Auxiliary Services and transport of goods by road which were availed by them for export of goods is denied. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidered the submissions. 5. With regard to the issue of time bar, I find that the issue has been dealt by the Tribunal in the case of Raymond Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai-III -2014-TIOL this Tribunal observed as under:- "5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. In the present case the refund claim pertains to the quarter October - December, 2008. The appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when procedure and practice are amended they have to be amended retrospectively and the benefit allowed if the procedures are satisfied. This Tribunal in the case of Sandoz Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has also held the same view. Further, the CBEC in Circular dated 12.03.2009 cited supra, have also held that so long as the refund claims is filed within the extended period of time provided for in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the condition 2(j) mentioned in the Notification No. 17/2009, I find that none of the authorities below has been given any specific finding and appellant has not given to reply to their query. Therefore, that purpose the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to examine the claim under the condition 2(j) of the said notification. 9. In these terms, appeal is disposed of by w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
