2015 (3) TMI 1061 - AT - Service Tax

Denial of refund claim - export of goods under Notification No. 17/2009, dated 7-7-2009 - Held that - I have gone through the notification wherein the assessee is entitled for refund of the Service Tax paid on the services availed by an exporter for services received which have been used for export of goods. Admittedly, this is not in dispute and there is no provision in the law that the proportionate credit is entitled for non-export of the goods. As the provision of the notifications are very clear if the service is used for export of goods. - No infirmity with the impugned orders. Same are upheld. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against refund claim on Service Tax paid for export of goods under Notification No. 17/2009
- Entitlement to refund claim based on quantity exported
- Interpretation of the notification for refund eligibility

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order allowing a refund claim on Service Tax paid by the respondent for exporting goods under Notification No. 17/2009. The respondent, a manufacturer exporter, had filed a refund claim on Service Tax paid for services used in exporting goods under the said notification. The lower authorities had approved the refund claim, leading to the Revenue's appeal.

2. The argument put forth by the ld. AR was that the respondent had exported a lesser quantity than what was indicated in the shipping bills. Therefore, it was contended that the respondent should not be entitled to a refund claim for the portion of quantity not exported. The Tribunal heard the ld. AR's contentions and reviewed the submissions made.

3. Upon examining the notification, it was found that the assessee was indeed entitled to a refund of the Service Tax paid for services used in exporting goods. The Tribunal noted that there was no provision in the law specifying that proportionate credit should be denied for goods not exported. The clear provision in the notification stated that the service should be used for exporting goods to qualify for a refund.

4. Consequently, the Tribunal did not identify any flaws in the impugned orders and upheld them. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed, affirming the respondent's entitlement to the refund claim. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court by the Tribunal.