2019 (11) TMI 245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion of Residential Complex Services, including commercial/industrial building or civil structure. Appellant is also receiving a taxable service of the nature of work contract services and had been depositing the service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Realising facts they were not liable to discharge the liability under reverse charge mechanism that the appellant filed a refund claim for an amount of Rs. 6,36,415/- on 18.10.2016 under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. The said refund claim was proposed to be rejected vide a show-cause notice No. 9171 dated 14.12.2016 on the ground that the value shown in the input service invoices vis-a-vis value shown in the S.T return do not match as far as the total value paid for receiving wo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Per contra learned D.R has justified the order under challenge impressing upon that after due findings the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has already held that the refund claim is admissible to the Appellant on merits. It is not even hit by the limitations. However, the same is ordered to be given to consumer welfare fund due to being hit by the Clause of unjust enrichment no infirmity has been found in the order. Appeal is accordingly prayed to be dismissed. 7. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the impugned record, I observe that Commissioner (Appeals) has already held that the claim of the Appellant is maintainable on merits same is also not hit but limitation. Nothing has been brought to the notice that any appeal has be....