2016 (11) TMI 146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant Mr. Pakshi Rajan, A.R. For the Respondent ORDER The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the order-in-appeal No.  229-234/2013 dated 28.06.2013  passed by  Commissioner (Appeals-II), Bangalore. 2.  Briefly  the facts of the present case are that the appellant is engaged in providing information technology service which  is designed to deal ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 5.  Thereafter Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax passed order dated 28.03.2011 holding that the appellant had exported information technology software service during the relevant period and fulfilled the terms and conditions mentioned in the Export Rules and sanctioned the refund amounting to only Rs. 5,53,639 and rejected the refund amounting to Rs. 41,92,296.  Aggrieved by the sai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d order is non-speaking and the learned Commissioner has not given any cogent reason as to how refund claim amounting to Rs. 4,94,049/- paid as service tax on the input service of scientific and technical consultancy are not used for providing the output services rendered when it is an admitted fact that the appellant is only into export of taxable services and all the services are used in relatio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urangabad [2010-20-STR 68(Tri-Mum)] iv) Victor Gasket India Ltd [2008(10)STR 369(Tri)] v) CCE Vs GTC Industries [2008(12)STR 468(Tri-LB)] vi) CCE Vs STanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd [2009(13)STR 289(Tri)] After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the records and judgments cited supra, I am of the considered opinion that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly rejected the ....