2009 (10) TMI 289

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Appellant. Sandeep Sachdeva for the Respondent. ORDER 1. Appellants had claimed a refund of Rs. 1,75,142 paid by them as a receiver of service. This is a second round of litigation. In first round of litigation, the matter had reached the Tribunal and the matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority to consider applicability of doctrine of unjust enrichment. The Original ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e tax paid by them as an expense which again proves that the service tax was borne by themselves and not passed on to anybody. 3. On the other hand learned DR submits that the very fact, that the tax has been shown as expenditure shows that the same has been recovered from the customers. If it was not the position, balance sheet would have shown it as receivable and not as an expenditure. Learn....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....certificates, copies of communication from their overseas clients, their working of service tax liability and a certificate from chartered accountant lead to an inference that the appellants have not charged any service tax from their clients and the same had been borne by them. The appellants had calculated their service tax liability on the gross amount received, which is also evident that they ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the judgment in the case of Mafatlal Industries 1997 (89) ELT 247 is misplaced inasmuch it relates to sale of goods wherein cost of inputs are necessarily incurred whereas in the present case it is provision of services, especially as commission agents, wherein mental inputs are incurred which cannot be compared in monetary terms. So far as the appellants are concerned they have made out their ca....