2017 (11) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... AC (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Revenue does not dispute to the proposition of the learned counsel that appellant was recipient of manpower services. On the basis of invoices issued by service provider, the service tax paid by him was taken as Cenvat credit by the appellant. But subsequently, when the appellant could understand the legal position that its liability should be confined to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rough above two modalities. Once, tax was paid by service provider and later by the service recipient. State has been doubly benefited. Therefore, recourse available to the State is to refund the money not due to the State. It is established principle of law that any amount not due to the State is not collectible as has been held in Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar-I v. Tata I....