2006 (2) TMI 633

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Respondent. ORDER The revenue is in appeal in all the three appeals against order- in-appeal dated 24-5-2004, wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund claim rejected by Order in Originals. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the respondents had availed the Service of the Goods Transport Operators for the period 16-7-97 to 16-10-98. The appell....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-97 to 1-6-98. On are appeal the appellate authority held that the refund is liable to be sanctioned to the respondent. Hence this appeal. 3. The learned Department Representative submits that the Respondent have paid the amount as Service Tax and are hence required to file the refund claim within the time period as provided in the statute. He relies upon the following Case Laws :- (i)&....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion No. 43/97-ST retrospectively, in other words the respondents were not taxable for the Service availed by them from the G.T.O. The respondents were not required to pay the amount, as tax, for the whole period i.e. from 16-7-97 to 16-10-98. The department has allowed the claim of the respondents for the period 16-11-97 to 1-6-98, but rejected the refund claim for the previous period and subsequ....