TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 158
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellant Shri Pakshirajan, Asst. Commissioner(AR), For the Respondent Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 1 1/10/2017 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has set aside the Order-in-original granting refund of Rs. 5,51 ,370/- to the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....original invoices were not produced and the Commissioner(AppeaIs) accepted the Department's appeal and set aside the Order-in-original. Hence the present appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused records. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and is contrary to the provisions of the act. He further submitted that the Commission....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al invoices. He also submitted that auditor has given the certificate that he has verified all the invoices. He also submitted that the Chartered Accountant certificate certifying that the services covered by the invoices were used for providing export services for the period from October 2013 to December 2013 and that the appellant is not in a position to utilize the CENVAT credit. In support of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hand, the learned AR reiterated the finding of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both sides, I find that the refund was sought to be rejected by the Commissioner(Appeals) on technical ground. Further I find that in this case, the Department has not questioned the nature of the services received by the exporter and the service tax paid by him. Further I find that the ori....