TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 948
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n appeal against the impugned order. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants Nectar Lifesciences Ltd. are manufacturer of excisable goods falling under Chapter Heading No. 29, 30 & 33 of the Excise Tariff. They filed two refund claims of Rs. 43,722/- and Rs. 77,367/- in relation to the services provided by CHA to exporter and for transport of export goods from ICD to Port under Not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellants do not want to contest. 4. On the claims for Inland Haulage Charges, he submitted that the Revenue has sought to classify the same as Business Support Services at the end of the recipient on the basis of the CBEC Circular No.137/131/2007-CX. dt. 12.12.2007. He further submitted that the above Circular pertains to postal mails and its application at the end of the recipient of the ser....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... his findings, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the CHA, vide their invoices has provided by himself or through third parties various services to the appellants including the service of Inland Haulage Charges. It is therefore clear that the services were provided by CHA to the appellant when they exported the goods under the aforesaid shipping bills. The finding of the Ld. Commissi....