TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1680
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellant in all the above cases is registered as a service provider under the categories of "Business Support Service and Business Auxiliary Service" and the common issue involved relates to the availment of refund of un-utilized Cenvat credit in terms of Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 and Notification No. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18.06.2012. The period involved is from April, 2012 to March 2014. The refund cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the refund claim made by the appellant and the appellant was called upon to show cause as to why:- (i) The refund claim filed by them for Rs. 84789/- under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for the period Julyl'13 to Sep.'13 should not be rejected for non-compliance of Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 made applicable to service tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act., 1944 as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant's claim was liable to be rejected for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 11 B of CEA, 1944, made applicable to service tax, to which the appellant has explained in detail in its reply as to its eligibility for refund. After considering the plea and based on the personal hearing, the adjudicating authority passed the OIO dated 12.07.2016 whereby he has rejected all the refund claims ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....int of time. By this, the ld. Counsel submits that, the requirement of reversal of credit while filing the refund claims was only to avoid double benefit to a claimant. He further explained that this is only to prevent double benefit in as much on the one hand refund of the credit is sanctioned and on the other hand, equal amount of credit retained in the books could also be used. Ld. Counsel fair....