2024 (6) TMI 88

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6/R/ACICGST/D4/ 2018-19 dt.10.08.2018 Rs.447732/- 01/12 to 03/12 2.1 The ground for rejection of the refund claim as per the impugned order are as follows:- "(A) Services not covered under default list:- In this regard, I observe that requisite approval for the specified services has to be accorded by the approval Committee, which is one of the essential conditions of Notification No. 17/2011-ST dated 01.03.2011 superseded by Notification No. 40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. If any service is not approved as specific service that same can not be taken for the refund per said Notification. The conditions provided under the said notification says that for the purpose of claiming exemption, the Unit of a SLZ or developer shall ob....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the said service is not allowed leading towards denial of refund claim of the same. B) Invoices of Services addressed to the outside of SEZ premises and having incomplete address: Refund has been rejected on the ground that either invoice address is outside SEZ premises or incomplete address is mentioned on the invoice. In this regard, the appellant pleaded that during the relevant period, it was undergoing shifting process from its DTA location to the current SEZ location and therefore invoices pertaining to purchase orders/provision of service for the interim period were addressed to DTA location. However, the services for which such invoices were raised pertained to the authorised operations of the SEZ unit only. Consequently,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... refund claim pertains to the period from Jan.-2012 to March-2012. Hence the refund on this count is disallowable. D. Excess Refund of Rs. 3090/- The Appellant submitted that they had mistakenly claimed excess refund amounting to Rs. 3,090/-, in relation to service rendered by M/s. Antham Health and Sports. In such scenario, the said amount of Rs. 3,090/- is being withdrawn. The issue is already settled as the said amount has been withdrawn by the appellant. E. Lastly, it has been alleged by the department that the Appellant had paid duty liabilities of Rs. 6,41,335/- from the Cenvat account of Inputs services taken by the SEZ unit, whereas no Cenvat Credit can be taken or utilized on behalf of Inputs on Inputs accumulated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....el submits that the same issue came before the consideration of the Bench and the Bench vide Final Order No.70277-70280 of 2023 dated 21st December, 2023 in Service Tax Appeal No.70377 of 2022 for the subsequent period have remanded the matter back to the Original Authority for verification and reconsideration of the refund claims. 3.3 Learned Departmental Representative has reiterated the impugned order. 4.1 I have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in the appeal and during the course of arguments. 4.2 Notification No.17/2011-ST dated 01.03.2011 which is under consideration in the present appeal was predecessor to Notification No.40/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 as is evident from the Preamble to the notifica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reasons for rejection/ modification. After due consideration of the issues in terms of the conditions laid down as per this notification the matter was remanded back to the Original Authority for reconsideration of refund claims in the light of the observations made in para 3.4, 3.5 & 3.6 of the order. Para 4.1 & 4.2 of the order are reproduced below:- "4.1 Appeals are allowed and the matter remanded to the original authority for reconsideration of the refund claims in the light of the observations made in this order. 4.2 As the issue is in respect of the refund claims filed in the year 2013 & 2015, Original Authority is directed to finalize the refund claims in remand proceedings within three months of the receipt of this....