2012 (5) TMI 471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. Revenue is an appeal against order-in-appeal No. SR/304/NGP/2009 dated 27.11.2009 whereby Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the lower adjudicating authorities order and allowed the appeal of the respondent with consequential relief. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent is engaged in the providing Business Auxiliary Service and paying service tax thereon.  The r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lever Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bhavnagar 2009 (93) RLT 403 (CESTAT-Ahmd.) wherein it was held that bar of unjust enrichment is not attracted in case of goods exported.  They have also placed reliance in the case of Sparkler Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Pune-I reported in 2011 (266) E.L.T. 394 (Tri.-Mumbai) wherein it was held that  question of unjust enrichment will not be applica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e charged the service tax to their client M/s. Earnest Young Pvt. Ltd. 6. I have carefully gone through the submissions and perused the records. I find that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the lower adjudicating authority order on the premise that the  grounds of unjust enrichment and that  the refund under Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 is not allowable were....