2008 (11) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri A.K. Rastogi, Authorised Departmental Representative (DR) for the respondent. [Order per Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)] - The Appellant raised bills to their franchisees wherein franchise and service tax was separately mentioned and according to the Appellant, against those bills only the franchise fee plus service tax  was received from franchisees. The Appellant, however, claim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as payable only on the portion representing the franchise fee,  as a result of which the service tax actually paid by the Appellant is more than the amount of service tax shown in the debit notes and according to them, the excess amount,  is refundable to them. He also pleaded that this excess amount is not hit by the principle of unjust enrichment, as the service tax actually paid by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of a notice mentioning the ground for rejecting the claim. 2.2 The learned DR reiterated the findings in the impugned order and pleaded that the service tax has been correctly paid and no amount is refundable to the Appellant. 3. I have considered the submissions from both the sides. I find that the refund claim has been rejected without issuing any show cause notice to the Appellant. I als....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....without deducting the service tax. However, the Dy. Commissioner inspite of this finding, concluded that no excess amount of service tax has been paid and this finding of the Dy. Commissioner was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).  4. As per the provision of Section 67(2) of the Finance Act,1994 where the gross amount charged by a service provider, for the service provided is inclusive ....