2016 (4) TMI 940

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sivaraman, JJ. For the Petitioner : Sri. E. K. Nandakumar For the Respondent : Sri. N. Nagaresh ASG JUDGMENT Anu Sivaraman, J. 1. This appeal is preferred against Annexure F order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25.09.2007. Appellant is a service provider under the category "Banking and Financial Services". It had received an amount of Rs. 40,00,000/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....03.2004. The original authority found that though service tax was paid in excess, the appellant is not entitled for refund on the ground of unjust enrichment and directed the refund to be sanctioned and credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund in terms of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It was held that the appellant had not produced any evidence to show that they had not passed on the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ected stating that the refund to the service provider had been made only on 27.10.2004, though show cause notice was issued on 27.07.2004 and original order was dated 23.09.2004. On the ground of delay in refunding the service tax collected, the appeal was rejected. 4. The appellant had taken a specific ground before the CESTAT that the service tax component in dispute was not passed on to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Chartered Accountant and the dates provided therein with regard to refund had not been considered by any of the authorities. It is therefore contended that the matter should gain the attention of the original authority with the material to show that refund of the excess service tax component had been made to the service recipient. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced on either sid....