TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 940
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... export. 2. The brief facts, as per the show cause notice dated 23/04/2015 for the period January, 2014 to March, 2014 are that the appellant is a SEZ unit. They claimed refund against payment of service tax on taxable services as defined in clause (105) of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994, which are provided in relation to the authorised operations in a Special Economies Zone, and received by a unit of SEZ, which are exempted from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon under Section 66 of the Finance Act. The appellant filed refund claim for Rs. 1,75,034/- on 20/10/2014 for the period January, 2014 to March, 2014 under Notification No.12/2013 ST. The main allegation in the SCN is that the appellant have claimed refund of Rs. 1,7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the appellant in support of the refund claim do not belong to their factory premises registered with the Central Excise office at Noida, as it pertains to the premises at "2705, Besement, Banki Street, Karol Bagh, Delhi Commissionerate". Accordingly, appellant required to show cause, why the refund of as input tax credit be not rejected. The SCN was adjudicated on contest vide Order-in-Original dated 21.01.2016 and the Original authority rejected the refund claim. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order was pleased to reject the appeal and upholding the rejection order of Original authority. 3. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. The learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad been provided loan facilities for its manufacturing unit at Noida. Service tax is charged by bank for service provided to the main factory/unit of the appellant. The advices of such service tax recovered from the appellant are issued at registered office address, which is in Delhi for administration purposes only. The Assistant Commissioner also relied upon the preceding order in the case of M/s Roto Pump Ltd. also located in NSEZ, Noida wherein under similar facts and circumstances, the refund was allowed and the Order-in-Original in question was accepted by the competent authority of the Department. This is to be also observed that it is a technical/procedural lapse. Further, referring to CBEC Circular No.112/6/2009 ST dated 12th March....