2023 (12) TMI 951

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Srinivas, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. M. Ambe, Deputy Commissioner (A.R) For the Respondent ORDER ORDER : Per Ms. SULEKHA BEEVI C. S. Brief facts are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of goods falling under Chapter 27 of CETA, 1985. They exported their goods and utilized certain services and claimed refund of service tax paid under the Notification No.17/2009-ST dt. 7.7.20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....axable Services Conditions (1) (2) (3) (4) 6. (zzp) (i) Service provided for transport of said goods from the inland container depot to the port of export; (ii) Service provided to an exporter in relation to transport of export goods directly from the place of removal, to inland container depot or port or airport, as the case may be, from where the goods are exported. (i) Exporter shall....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....present case, the appellant has furnished Chartered Accountant certificate wherein the shipping bills as well as transportation charges have been given in detail. The adjudicating authority has refused to apply Board's circular and has held that the notification prevails over the Board's circular. It is submitted that the Board's circular is binding on the department. The said clarific....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri M. Ambe appeared and argued for the Department. The condition of the notification was asserted by the Ld. A.R to argue that as the lorry receipts have not been produced by the appellant, refund has been rightly rejected. The findings by the original authority was reiterated by the Ld.A.R. 7. Heard both sides. 8. The issue that arises for consideration is whether the rejection of refund claim ....