2017 (3) TMI 1511

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondent ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order rejecting their refund claim filed by them under Notification No.41/2007 dt. 06.10.2007 for the services used in export of goods. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed refund claim for the quarter ending September, 2008 on 11.05.2009 for the services of CHA, Courier Service and Bus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... claim. B. The refund claim is barred by limitation. C. The Courier Service and CHA are Business Support Services, therefore, they are not entitle. 6. The drawback claim has been calculated on the basis of the inputs used for manufacturing of the export goods but does not include the services covered under Notification No.41/2007. Therefore, claiming drawback by the appellants....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation 41/2007-S.T. The said Notification was amended vide Notification No.17/2009, dated 7-7-2009 so as to allow filing of the refund claim within a period of one year from the date of export of the goods. Inasmuch as the appellant filed the refund claims in July, 2009 for the quarter ending October-December, 2008, the refund claims are within a period of one year from the date of export of the go....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....refund, subject to satisfaction of other conditions stipulated in the Notification. 6. Following the above decisions, I hold that, in the present case also, the appellant is eligible for the benefit of refund claim filed under Notification No. 41/2007 as amended by Notification No.17/2007 and the time bar aspect is not attracted. However, the appellant has to satisfy that they have fulfil....