TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1277
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... : Ms Suchitra Sharma, Commr, AR Per: G Raghuram: Heard the ld. Consultant for the appellant and ld. AR for the respondent. 2. This appeal illustrates the negative approach of Revenue in dealing with claims for refund. The appellant / assessee who filed a refund claim was driven from one Officer to another for granting refund of service tax remitted by it to the service provider, for no ostensi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Division-II, Delhi claiming a refund of Rs. 4,26,305/-, constituting the service tax remitted by the appellant towards the non-taxable service of construction of a bridge, provided by M/s Gannon Dunkerly & Co. Limited. On 20.04.2012, the Deputy Commissioner, Delhi returned the refund claim on the ground that the appellant was not within his jurisdiction and therefore he had no power to grant refu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the claim for refund both the grounds as proposed in the show cause notice. 5. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal which was also rejected by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Raipur by the impugned order dated 09.10.2013. It requires to be noticed that the impugned order allowed the appellant's contention on the aspect of the bar of limitation since the appellant had f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant which is a recipient of a service which is admittedly not taxable files a claim for refund within the prescribed period of limitation, it is axiomatic that it is entitled to do so before the Commissionerate under whose jurisdiction it pursues its taxable activities, business or is a registrant; or before the Commissionerate having authority over the provider of the service. That would ....