2017 (3) TMI 243

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....had been availing the services from the agents from abroad for procuring export orders and for marketing their products abroad. Earlier the appellant was of the bona fide belief that since this service is provided from abroad and utilized for marketing the products abroad; there was no service tax liability on their part. Further, the Superintendent of Central Excise visited the appellant s premises on 20.3.2007 and directed the appellant to pay the service tax on the commission paid to overseas agent. Accordingly, the appellant took the service tax registration on 2.4.2007 and made a total payment of Rs. 37,37,123/- towards their past service tax liability. Thereafter, a show-cause notice dated 23.11.2007 was issued to the appellant and af....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... notice dated 31.12.2012 was issued proposing to reject the refund of interest paid voluntarily by the appellant during investigation. The Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 4.3.2013 rejected the claim for refund of interest. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (A) and the Commissioner (A) has also rejected the appeal of the appellant and hence the present appeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned consultant for the appellant submitted that the impugned order denying the interest on the amount illegally retained by the department is not sustainable in law. In support of his submission, he relied upon the two case laws: I. Binjrajka Steel Tubes Ltd. v....