2015 (11) TMI 678

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Appellant. Shri A.K. Nigam, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER In both the appeals, issue involved is same and therefore both the appeals are taken together and a common order is passed. In the first appeal ST/2016/2011, the refund of Rs. 7,31,625/- sanctioned by the original adjudicating authority has been held to have been sanctioned wrongly and his order has been re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere in the year 2009, Secunderabad was also added. In the meantime, the appellant had applied for refund of the service tax paid in respect of the input services to the Department. The credit of service tax was paid in respect of renting of immovable property received by their branches and taken in the Bangalore office. The Commissioner in exercise of powers vested in Section 84, issued two show-c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ar.)]. Covers the issue. Therefore credit could not have been denied on the ground that the branches were not registered. As regards availment of credit by Bangalore headquarter without a centralized registration, the fact that appellant had applied for centralized registration but Department issued registration only in respect of headquarter would render it to be a technical issue since there is ....