2022 (2) TMI 1008

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Appellant Shri Vikas Jhajharia, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER : The only issue urged in this appeal is the rejection of refund claim as being barred by limitation as well as being hit by unjust enrichment. 2. Heard Smt. Radhika Chandrasekhar, Learned Advocate for the appellant and Shri Vikas Jhajharia, Learned Assistant Commissioner for the Revenue. 3.1 I have....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he prescribed period of limitation. 3.2 On this score, therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained. 4. The other finding in the impugned order, that the Final Order of the CESTAT did not cover the Service Tax paid for the earlier period (i.e., from 01.06.2005 to 30.05.2007), is also seriously disputed on the ground that the Tribunal itself has held, going by the provisions, that there ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en the invoices did not reflect the element of Service Tax which is charged from its customers, which were also available with the Department. The Revenue has not pointed out any defects in the above documents and there is also no discussion as to the genuineness or otherwise of the same. 5.3 In view of the above, I find that the allegation of unjust enrichment has not been proved by the Revenu....