2015 (9) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....684/-for the period 09/2004 to 06/2005. A show-cause notice was issued proposing rejection of the refund claim on 18/11/2005 on the ground that documents submitted by them failed to fulfill the conditions prescribed in CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004(CCR) and the appellants have not been able to show that incidence of duty has not been passed on. The second claim filed by the appellant was for Rs. 1,61,645/- for the period from 07/2005 to 08/2005 and show-cause noticed was issued on 29/03/2006 proposing to reject the claim on the ground that Notification No.11/2002-NT dt. 01/03/2002 for refund of CENVAT credit in respect of inputs used does not cover refund of service tax paid on input services. The second ground related to unjust enrichment as i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the refund claim prior to 14/03/2006 when notification was issued providing for refund of CENVAT credit paid on input service, refund is not admissible in respect of input services. 5. I have considered the submissions made by both sides.  I find that both the authorized representatives has not contradicted the claim that in respect of CENVAT credit refund, there is no need to examine unjust enrichment.  As regards the eligibility for refund for the period prior to 14/03/2006, I find that all the three decisions of the Tribunal relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants are applicable to the facts of this case.  As regards WNS Global decision (supra) the issue before the Hon'ble High Court was not whether the....