TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o pay service tax on transportation of rice as same was exempt from payment of service tax as per Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20 June 2012 in terms of Section 66 (4) of Finance Act, 1994. Reliance placed in the case of M/S HITACHI METALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS CCE ST- GURGAON-I, GURGAON [ 2019 (6) TMI 1320 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH] where on identical issue, it was held that the time-limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant availed transportation services of transportation of rice and paid the service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Later on, the appellant realized that transportation of rice is exempt from payment of service tax, therefore, they filed the refund claim. The said refund claim was rejected on the ground of tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise Act, 1944 is not applicable to the facts of this case. 4. On the other hand learned AR for Revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties considered the submissions. On consideration of submissions and after examined the records I find that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on transportation of rice as same was exempt from payment of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount had been paid on a mistaken notion with respect to the liability for excess production under a notification which was later discovered to be not correct. In the present case, levy never applied - a fact conceded by no less than the authority of CBEC. In these circumstances, the general principle alluded to in Krishna Carbon Paper Co. (supra) would apply. Consequently, the appeal has to succee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
