2018 (6) TMI 130

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....V. Ravindran This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No. PUNEXCUS-001-APP-491/2017-18 dated 16.10.2017. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. Brief facts of the case is that appellant herein had filed refund claim of Rs. 30,86,489/- erroneously paid during July 2012 to December 2015, that tax was paid on the amounts disbursed to Managing Director on salary. Appellant fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t Construction v. CCE - 2018 (359) ELT 113 (Bom.) to submit that the provision of section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 will not be applicable, as service tax liability does not arise and is also the findings of the adjudicating authority. 5. Learned D.R. submits that provisions of section 11B of the said Act will be applicable as per the judgement in the case of Andrew Telecom (I) Pvt. Ltd. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p between the appellant and the Managing Director. If that be so, provision of section 11B would not be attracted, as has been held in the case of Parijat Construction supra. In the said case, Lordships had an occasion to consider a similar set of facts, wherein the petitioner therein was not required to pay service tax but paid the same and subsequently filed refund claim which was rejected by th....