2009 (2) TMI 43

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs, has upheld the Orders-in-Original both dated 20.12.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Service Tax Cell), Central Excise, Pune-I by which the Assistant Commissioner has rejected the refund claims of Rs. 2,47,667/- and Rs. 86,109/- on the ground of unjust enrichment. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. Since the issue involved in both the appeals relates to the applicability of the unjust enrichment clause, these are being taken up for disposal by a common order. 4. Appeal No. ST/168/08-Amount involved Rs. 86,109/-. The admissibility of refund claim on merits is not under dispute. It has been held that the service tax is not leviable on the actual expenses, incurred by the foreign consultant while imparting tra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... same. The reason being that the actual expenses, incurred by the foreign consultant while imparting training to the appellants personnel in Japan and subsequently reimbursed by the appellants, were held to be not towards consulting engineering services as these expenses related to living, food and travel provided to appellants technicians in Japan. Hence no service tax was leviable on it. Therefore, whatever amount, which was paid as tax on these expenses incurred and reimbursed, was not towards any service rendered. Hence, it is not service tax and no credit for the same is available as input service credit. Amount being not input service credit, the said clause (c) is not attracted and the refund claim will be governed by the doctrine of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hieved by treating the same as an asset or deposit. 6. I have carefully considered the above submissions of the appellants. However, I do not find them to be tenable as any payment, if debited to Profit and Loss Account is to be considered as the revenue expenditure and shall amount to addition to the cost of the finished goods. It is admitted fact that in this case the appellants have debited the impugned amount to the Profit and Loss Account and thus the cost of the finished goods has increased to this extent. The sound accounting principles require that against the current year's receipts, the true cost, which has been incurred for earning such receipts, has to be charged.  This has been upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in ....