2017 (12) TMI 1144

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i. V.R. Reddy, Asst. Comm. (AR), for respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair 1. The fact of the case is that the appellant is having centralized service tax registration and engaged in providing "Business Support Service, Information Technology Software Services, Internet Telecommunication Service, Management Consultants, Commercial training and Coaching" falling under Section 65 (105) of Chapt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unt sanctioned was restricted to Rs. 3,01,508/- in accordance with the Notification No.5/2006-CE(NT) dated 14/03/2006. On being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal with a request to grant balance refund of Rs. 6,99,942/-, which was rejected in order dated 17/02/2012. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order-in-original rejected the appeal filed by the appellant. Therefore, 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

....anufacture of final product which is cleared for export under the bond or letter of undertaking. Maximum refund = Total Cenvat credit taken on input services during the given period x export turnover divided by Total turnover In the instant case the calculation is mentioned below: Cenvat Credit availed during the quarter Oct 2010 to Dec 2010 = 10,56,525 Export Turnove....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3/- should be allowed. 3. Shri V.R. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings in the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both sides, we find that the adjudicating authority has taken Rs. 3,18,090/- as the amount unutilized and accordingly calculated the refund. However, the refund should have been calculate....