2017 (11) TMI 834

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner(Appeals) has remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority as per Section 85(4) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the limited purpose of verification of quantum of rebate to be sanctioned to the appellant. Since the issue involved in these appeals is common, they are disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a EOU and are engaged in the business of exporting software development services as well as BPO services and are availing CENVAT credit under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant filed rebate claim under Notification No.11/2005-ST for the period April 2010 to September 2010, amounting to Rs. 50,51,374/- but said claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oduce documents to establish that the Cenvat credit was utilised for payment of service tax on service exported. I direct the adjudicating authority to pass an order within 3 months from the receipt of this order. Aggrieved by the corrigendum order dt. 17/01/2017 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals), appellants have filed the present appeals. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned consultant for the appellant submitted that the corrigendum order passed deleting the line Interest will also be paid in accordance with law. from the Order-in-Appeal dt. 24/08/2016 is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without any basis and after the period of three months from the date of passing the earlier order. ....