2023 (11) TMI 306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Department. During the disputed period, the appellant had filed an application before the jurisdictional Service Tax authorities claiming refund of Service Tax of Rs. 10,58,10,484/- under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification No. 27/2012-C.E. (N.T.) dated 18.06.2012. The refund application was disposed of by the Dy. Commissioner of Service Tax vide order dated 30.01.2017 in sanctioning the amount of Rs. 8,51,67,603/- and rejected the refund claim amounting to Rs. 2,06,42,881/- in terms of Rule 5 ibid read with Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The said original order dated 30.01.2017 was reviewed by the Department and vide Review Order dated 20.04.2017, the Reviewing Committee has directed the concerned o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vour of the Revenue. Further, learned Advocate has submitted that the issue arising out of the impugned order is no more res integra inasmuch as on identical facts Department's appeals rejected by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) were accepted by the Department and no appeal has been preferred against such decisions. In this context, learned AR also fairly concedes that for different period from July, 2012 to June, 2015, the Department has sanctioned the refund benefit in favour of the party by relying upon the order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the learned Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (Appeals-II), Mumbai. Thus, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the Department cannot adopt pick and chose theory for ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It is also settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that Review proceedings cannot go beyond the grounds taken in the show-cause notice, as held in the cases of CCE, Nagpur Vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. - 2007 (215) ELT 489 (SC), Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. Shital International - 2010 (259) ELT 165 (SC) and CCE, Bhubaneswar-I Vs. Champdany Industries Ltd. - 2009 (241) ELT 481 (SC) that the show-cause notice is the foundation in the matter of levy and recovery of duty, penalty and interest. Thus, Revenue cannot take a new ground at the appellate stage which was not canvassed in the show-cause notice issued by the Department. Further, the law is well settled in the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2003 (151) 2....