2018 (9) TMI 1138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. The appellant, a service provider under the category of Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service, filed an application for refund under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for the period October, 2011 to March, 2012 of Rs. 2,48,869/- After due process of law and being satisfied with the merit in the assessee's claim, the Original Authority vide Order-in-Original dt. 10.04.2013 sanctioned refund of Rs. 45,352/- and rejected the balance on the ground that the same was not eligible in terms of Notification No. 5/2006 CE (NT) dt. 14.03.2006 read with Notification No. 7/2010 CE (NT) dt. 27.02.2010. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the order rejecting the refund for the invoices raised for the period October,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ld. DR, Shri. R. Subramaniyan, though supports the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), however, submits that the issue stands covered by the decision of the Larger Bench (supra). 5.1 I have considered the contentions made at the bar and also gone through the findings of the Larger Bench. The relevant portion of the Larger Bench decision reads as under: "11. The definition of relevant date in Section 11B does not specifically cover the case of export of services. Hence, it is necessary to interpret the provisions constructively so as to give its meaning such that the objective of the provisions; i.e. to grant refund of unutilized Cenvat credit, is facilitated. By reference to the Service Tax Rules, 1994 as well as the successo....