2019 (2) TMI 595

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....commodation services and air travel agency service. The appellant approached the Commissioner (Appeals) against the said order who upheld the rejection of refund in respect of these services. Aggrieved, the appellants are now before the Tribunal. 2. The ld. counsel Shri Harish Bindumadhavan has given the details of the impugned services, period of dispute and the amount involved as per the Table furnished below:- Particulars Details Total Appeal No. ST/42370/2018 ST/42371/2018   Period of dispute April - June 2016 July - September 2016   Total CENVAT Credit disallowed 1,70,593/- 2,62,858/- 4,33,451/- Input services involved Short term accommodation and hotel room charges 4,33,451/- 3. He referred to Rule 5 of C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o. 334/1/2012-TRU dated 16.3.2012. It is also submitted by him that the Tribunal in the appellant's own case vide Final Order No.43375 to 43381/2017 dated 27.12.2017 had considered the very same issue and allowed the refund claim. Though this decision was brought to the notice of the authorities below, the same was not considered. 4. The ld. AR Shri Jagan Babu supported the findings in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The issue is with regard to the rejection of refund claim in respect of short-term accommodation service and air travel agency service. The appellant has pleaded that these services were used for accommodation of the employees when they were undertaking business travel and therefore is eligible for refund. The Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....imed refund claim and the same needs to be examined in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules read with notification issued there under. It is seen that the lower authorities has not deal with this issue. Lower authorities have gone into the admissibility of the Cenvat Credit already availed. In these circumstances, it is not possible to uphold the impugned order. If the lower authorities wanted to challenge the admissibility of credit, the same cannot be done while examining the refund claim of the appellant, without following the due process prescribed. 5. Notification No. 5/2006 has been issued under the said Rule. It is seen that Rule 5 and the Notification issued there under prescribed refund of Cenvat availed on (i) inputs and input a....