2026 (3) TMI 150

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 03.03.2009 which were rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 874 & 875/2014 dated 24.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals), Bangalore. Aggrieved by this rejection of refund claims, the appellant is in appeal before us. 2. The Learned Counsel submits that the refund claims pertain to the period from October 2009 to December 2009 and January 2010 to March 2010. It is submitted that they are into providing services under the category of Information Technology Services, Business Auxiliary Services etc. and the appellant had filed refund claims which was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that they have been filed beyond the period of 6 months prescribed under pro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of service tax paid in respect of services consumed wholly within the special economic zone under the provisions of Notification No. 9/2009 S.T. dated 3/3/2009 as amended by Notification No. 15/2009 S.T. dated 20/5/2009. 4.2. Further, preliminary scrutiny of the refund application has also revealed that the claimant has not fulfilled the following conditions of the Notification under which the refund claim has been made. (i) The claimant has not furnished any documentary proof such as Bank Statement etc., as required under para 2(g) (II) of the Notification No. 15/2009 S.T. dated 20/5/2009, In support of their claim that payment of Service Tax has been made by them to the providers of specified services. (ii) The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case, the claimant have filed the subject refund claim on 31.12.2010 claiming a refund of Rs.8,83,692/- said to have been paid on the specified services utilized in relation to the authorised operations in the Special Economic Zone Unit, under the provisions of Notification No. 9/09 dated 03.03.2009, as amended by Notification No. 15/09 dated 20.05.2009 for the period January to March 2010. Further, the bank statement furnished by applicant, in support of their claim, also revealed that the applicant has made the payment to their Service Provider during the period January 2010 to March 2010. Thus, it is abundantly clear that the applicant has not fulfilled the obligation of time limit prescribed under the proviso 2 (e) of the Notification N....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment with the view expressed by the Tribunal that nowhere in the show cause notice it has been alleged by the Department that Lean Gas is a final product. Ultimately, an assessee is required to reply to the show cause notice and if the allegation proceeds on the basis that Lean Gas is a by-product, then there is no question of the assessee disputing that statement made in the show cause notice. 5.3 Similarly in the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Brindavan Beverages P. Ltd. (supra) held as follows: "10. ............ The show cause notice is the foundation on which the department has to build up its case. If the allegations in the show cause notice are not specific and ar....