2025 (1) TMI 146

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... RAO , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Ms. Radhika Chandrasekar , Advocate for the Appellant Shri Harendra Singh Pal , Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER Per : Shri P. Dinesha The issue in this case rests on a very narrow compass; facts in brief that are relevant, are as available in the Order in-Original, which are also not disputed by both the parties. The same is reproduced ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. Goods Transport Agency (GTA) 2. Man Power Supply Service 3. Import of Services 2. From the above, it is very much clear that the original application for refund dated 30.05.2013 was very much within the time limitation of 2-years prescribed under the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The subsequent filing of the application of refund is cl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oduce". The period of claim in the case on hand was only up to 30.09.2012 and hence, the above exemption notification was not applicable in the present case. It is contended by the claimant that by the amendment brought in w.e.f. 01.04.2013 is only clarification in nature would be applicable from the date of very inception and hence, the denial is not in accordance with law. In any case, it was fu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the same is required to be issued when the Revenue does not propose to entertain the refund claim of the claimant. It's a different matter altogether if the application for refund is accepted and refund is granted, in which event, no such SCN is required. This is more relevant as it assumes importance for a bona fide claimant to know the stand of the revenue as to the grounds for not entertaining ....