2017 (8) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Mishra, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr.Swapnil Bangur, Advocate ORDER P.C. : 1 The appellant assails the order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the appeal. 2 The refund claimed of Rs. 14,97,334/is made on 6th July 2014 in respect of service tax paid during the period between October 2001 to February 2003. Another refund of Rs. 5,31,607/is made for the period between June 2003 and Februar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d counsel submits that rejection of another claim of Rs. 5,31,607/on the ground of unjust enrichment is also erroneous. No reasons are given while rejecting the said claim. Only relying upon the agreement wherein it is stated that the said consideration is inclusive of all taxes and duties is improper. The taxes as suggested is the taxes as payable. The appellant has not passed on this burden of p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....richment. 5 We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the respective parties. 6 As far as the rejection of the claim of Rs. 14 lakh and odd on the ground of limitation is concerned, the same appears to be only on the ground that claim of refund was made after lapse of one year after payment of the service tax. No other aspect appears to have been considered by the A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Circular. The Circular is only clarificatory in nature. As such, there is no question of its prospective or retrospective operation. 7 It is clear that for the transaction in question, the appellant was not liable to pay service tax. 8 In light of the above, the rejection of the claim on the ground of limitation is unjustifiable. 9 As far as the rejection of claim of Rs. 5 lakh and odd ....