Tribunal Orders New Review of Service Tax Refund Claim Due to Procedural Flaws and Lack of Hearing by Authorities.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for a denovo adjudication of the appellant's refund claim for service tax. It found that the appellant had submitted the necessary documents and disagreed with the original authority's conclusions. The Tribunal noted procedural deficiencies, including the lack of a proper hearing by the Commissioner (Appeals). The original authority was instructed to reconsider the case, taking into account the relevant notifications and evidence, with a deadline of two months for completion.

---

---

Issues involved:
The appeal against rejection of refund claim of service tax amounting to Rs. 7,27,884 filed by the appellant.

Facts of the case:
The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of transformers, filed a refund claim for service tax paid on Erection, Commissioning & Installation services for transmission of electricity exempted under Notification No. 11/2010-ST. The department raised objections, demanded documents, and rejected the refund claim. The appellant submitted evidence including work orders, invoices, and a certificate from Punjab State Electricity Board.

Contentions:
The appellant argued that they were entitled to the benefit of Notification 45/2010 dated 20.07.2010, which exempted services even for the period before 27.02.2010. They contended that the refund claim was within the limitation period. The appellant also disputed the authorities' conclusion that the burden of duty had been passed on to customers, stating they had not charged service tax in their invoices to PSEB.

Decision:
After considering submissions, the Tribunal found that the appellant had paid service tax for the relevant period and had submitted necessary documents. The Tribunal disagreed with the original authority's conclusion that the appellant had failed to establish the timing of services provided. It also noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had not afforded a proper hearing to the appellant. The Tribunal directed a remand to the original authority for a fresh adjudication, considering the notifications and documents provided by the appellant, with a deadline of 2 months for completion.

Outcome:
The appeal was allowed by way of remand for denovo adjudication of the refund application filed by the appellant.

---