2015 (7) TMI 68

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ase are that, the appellants are engaged in the activity of building various infrastructural and other projects for Government and Non government organizations. They have filed four refund claims on 25.03.2008 for refund of service tax paid on construction services rendered to M/s. Madhaya Pradesh State Electricity Board and M/s. Ginni Global Limited. The three refund claims were rejected by the D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not entitled for refund of service tax as claimed by them. Meanwhile the fourth claim was also rejected by the lower authority on merits and on the issue of time bar vide OIO No. 41/2009 (R) dated 22.05.2009. The appellants again went to appeal against the above four orders before Commissioner (Appeals-II). The Commissioner (Appeals-II) vide OIA No. 46 to 49/2009 (H-II) ST dated 30.07.2009 has se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and received by the original authority on 18.08.2009 was considered as a refund claim and sanctioned within the period of three months specified under the law and thereafter aggrieved by the fact that interest was not calculated and paid from considering the date of filing original refund claim, the appellants filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) also took....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is no dispute on this fact also since this was what started more than one round of litigation in this case. Therefore in my opinion this was the date that should have been considered for the purpose of claim for interest by the appellant by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). As submitted by the learned CA this view is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ranba....