2007 (11) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3-5-2006 by which the Commissioner (Appeals), Cochin has confirmed the Order-in-Original No.194/2005 dated 17-11-2005, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise Service Division, Kochi rejecting the refund application filed by the appellants. Show cause notice No. 06/2005 dated 28-2-2005 has been served on the appellants stating that they had filed a refund application dated 1-11-200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and ENPIPL paid service tax on the entire amount. Out of the aforesaid total bill value, ENPIPL reimbursed Rs.19,12,324/- in-advertently and M/s. UPSL again paid the service tax on the same amount which had already been taxed in the hands of ENPIPL. This amounts to Rs.1,54,800/-. So the claim for refund of Rs.1,54,800/- being the double payment of service tax. The application was accompanied w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amount was stated to have been paid by M/s. ENPIPL on the total amount charged in the bill used to customers. After examining the facts, it was stated that the evidence produced is not sufficient and no explanation has been given for variation of amount paid under the challans to support the claim. It was stated that the assessee did not produce any relevant documents (TR6 challans in original) ob....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s documents now produced to show that their claim is supported by documentary evidence. He prays for remanding the matter to the original authority. 4. The learned SDR opposes the prayer and contends that there was no double payment and there were two activities on which the service tax has been discharged. Therefore she submits that the impugned order is legal and proper and the appeal is to b....