Page 99 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2
P. 99

2020 ] DECCAN SHOPPE PVT. LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, HYDERABAD 185
               en by the appellant, refund cannot be rejected on the ground that there was no
               nexus between input and output services without  any findings on its adverse
               impact on the quality and efficiency of the provision of services exported. Hence
               the order.
                                                ORDER
                       6.  The appeal is allowed and the Order No. PK/339/ME/2018, dated
               23rd April, 2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-II), CGST and Central
               Excise, Mumbai  is hereby set aside. The appellant  is entitled to get refund  of
               Rs. 11,45,551/- with interest as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944
               from the respondent department. The respondent department is directed to pay
               the same within two months from the date of receipt of this order.
                               (Order pronounced in the Court on 10-10-2019)
                                                _______

                              2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 185 (Tri. - Hyd.)
                          IN THE CESTAT, REGIONAL BENCH, HYDERABAD
                                            [COURT NO. I]
                                Shri P. Venkata Subba Rao, Member (T)
                                   DECCAN SHOPPE PVT. LTD.
                                                Versus
                     COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, HYDERABAD

                  Final Order No. A/30577/2019, dated 30-9-2019 in Appeal No. ST/30269/2019
                       Refund of deposits made through challans not utilized towards pay-
               ment of duty - Relevant date - Rejection of application for claim filed beyond
               one year from date of deposit - HELD : Date of payment of duty yet to begin in
               case where amount has been deposited only in account current but not been
               utilized towards payment of Service Tax - Hence, relevant date not yet begun
               in this case - Consequently, application for refund to be within time limit and
               hence, needs to be sanctioned - Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as ap-
               plicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994. [paras 9, 10, 11]
                       Refund of deposits made through challans not utilized towards pay-
               ment of duty - As per Clause (b) to proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 11B of
               Central Excise Act, 1944, unspent advance deposits lying in balance in appli-
               cant’s current account covered by Section 11B ibid - Once deposit covered by
               Section 11B ibid, it is not open for anyone to pick and choose which portion of
               Section 11B ibid applies to them and which does not - Entire provisions of Sec-
               tion  11B ibid apply in  absence  of  any specific clause indicating otherwise -
               Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service Tax vide Sec-
               tion 83 of Finance Act, 1994. [paras 9, 10, 11]
                                                                         Appeal allowed
                       REPRESENTED BY :     Shri K. Chandra Sekhar, Consultant, for the
                                            Appellant.
                                            Shri L.V. Rao, Authorised Representative, for the
                                            Respondent.

                                     GST LAW TIMES      11th June 2020      99
   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104