Case Law Details

Case Name : Monarch Catalyst (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise [(2015) 56 421 (Mumbai - CESTAT)]
Appeal Number :
Date of Judgement/Order :
Related Assessment Year :
 CA Bimal Jain

In instant case, Monarch Catalyst (P) Ltd. (the Appellant) was engaged in export of goods and for that purpose availing services of certain commission agents located abroad(Impugned services) on which Service tax paid under Reverse Charge. Accordingly the Appellant filed the refund claim under Notification No. 18/2009-ST dated July 7, 2009. However, while filing the refund claim by mistake instead of mentioning Notification No. 18/2009-ST, dated July 7, 2009, they mentioned Notification No. 17/2009-ST, dated July 7, 2009 which did not cover the Impugned services. The Department rejected refund claim as not maintainable under Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated July 7, 2009 but did not issue SCN or grant personal hearing.

The Hon’ble CESTAT, Mumbai held that the refund claim could not have been rejected without issuing SCN or granting personal hearing merely because wrong Notification number was mentioned.

Hence, the matter was remanded back for consideration of refund claim afresh under correct Notification No. 18/2009-ST, dated July 7, 2009.

(Bimal Jain, FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons),  Email:

Click Read Other Articles from CA Bimal Jain

Author Bio

More Under Service Tax

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

October 2020