9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... L. Patra, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent ORDER RAJU : This appeal has been filed by M/s. Sopariwala Exports Pvt. Limited against denial of refund under Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant pointed out that they had availed services for the purpose of export and filed refund claim on 12.05.2009 in respect of commission paid to overseas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot filed within a period of six months and therefore, the same was held as barred by limitation. Ld. Counsel pointed out that in identical circumstances, their refund claim has been allowed by this Tribunal vide order reported at 2019 (22) GSTL 274 (Tri. Ahmd.). He argued that since the quantification of commission payable to foreign service provider took time and therefore, the service tax was pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rse charge mechanism was effected on 07.05.2009. We find force in the contention of the Ld. Advocate for the appellant inasmuch as that Notification No. 41/2007-S.T., dated 6-10-2007 exempts the taxable services received by the exporter and used for export of the goods from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon under Section 66 and Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994. In the present case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant for deficit of document, namely, proof of payment of service tax, after it was filed on 16-3-2016. In these circumstances, in our opinion, the refund claim cannot be rejected on the ground of time bar, since, they have complied with the condition of filing the refund claim within 6 months from the date of export of goods for the relevant quarter i.e. from July, 2008 to Sept., 2008. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
