2015 (2) TMI 1225 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - accumulated CENVAT credit - Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - various input services - Held that - Since eligibility of the services has been considered in the decisions cited by assessee, I find that the assessee is eligible for refund claimed by them - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim of Cenvat credit for Information Technology Software Services (ITSS) by a STPI unit. Revenue's appeal against partial refund granted and assessee's appeal against balance amount not allowed.

Analysis:
The judgment involves the consideration of refund claims of Cenvat credit by a STPI unit providing ITSS. The Revenue contested the partial refund granted, while the assessee appealed against the non-allowance of the balance amount. The Revenue objected to the refund concerning services like Outdoor Catering, Clearing & Forwarding, Practicing C.A. services, and Management and Business Consultancy services. On the other hand, the assessee challenged the rejection of refunds for various services.

The decision-making process involved a detailed analysis of each service for which the refund was rejected. The counsel for the assessee presented a table listing the services, their nature, the assessee's view on the input services, and the decisions relied upon. Notable services included Management, Maintenance or Repair service, General Insurance, Outdoor catering, Manpower Recruitment and Supply services, Security Agency's services, Air travel agent's services, Banking or Other Financial Service, Customs House Agent Services, Chartered Accountant's services, Telecommunication services, Management and Business Consultancy services, Information Technology Software services, Erection, Commissioning and installation services, and Commercial or Industrial Construction services.

The judgment highlighted that the eligibility of the services had been thoroughly examined in the decisions cited by the counsel. Consequently, it was concluded that the assessee was entitled to the claimed refund. As a result, the appeal by the assessee was allowed, and the Revenue's appeal was rejected. Additionally, the cross objection filed by the assessee was disposed of during the proceedings. The judgment was pronounced in open court by the concerned authority.