2019 (9) TMI 1409

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the respondent ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim has been rejected. 2. The brief facts of the case are that during the period from 2006-07 to 2008-09, the demand of service tax was raised against the appellant on the observations made by the audit party that they were receiving reimbursement of travelling charges incurred by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner (Appeals), who rejected the whole of the refund claim on the ground of unjust enrichment and also held the part of refund claim is barred by limitation. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. Heard the parties. 4. As the facts are not in dispute that reimbursement of travelling charges incurred by providing taxable service during the period from 2006-07 to 2008-09 and the s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant within three months from the date of the order whereas in this case, the appellant has forced to file refund claim which was ultimately filed on 13.06.2014. Therefore, the refund claim cannot be held barred by limitation. 5. With regard to the unjust enrichment, the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order held that the appellant has failed to show documentary evidence that they have not passe....