2011 (6) TMI 311 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of Service Tax - CHA services - Goods exported out of India in pursuance of Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 6-10-2007 - The appellants have paid Service Tax on specified services used for export of goods - The goods have been exported and the Service Tax was paid on input services for which refund has been claimed - The above facts are not in dispute - find that both the lower authorities have rejected the refund claim on the ground that in case of CHA services the name figuring on shipping bill is different from the name of CHA who has paid the service Tax - In case of refund relating to Service Tax paid on Bill of lading the refund claim has been rejected on the ground that service provider is registered under Business Auxiliary Services whereas the benefit has been claimed under port services - Held that - Board Circular No. 112/6/2009-ST dated 12-3-2009 granting refund to exporters on taxable services that he received and uses for export do not require verification of registration certificate of the supplier of service - Therefore refund should be granted in such cases - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Refund of Service Tax on CHA services and port services under Notification No. 41/2007-ST.

Analysis:
The appellants, engaged in manufacturing textile yarn, exported goods and sought refund of Service Tax paid on specified services used for export. The lower authorities rejected the refund claim citing discrepancies in the names on shipping bills for CHA services and the registration of service providers for port services. The appellant argued that refund should be granted as per Notification No. 41/2007-ST without verifying the registration certificate of the service provider, relying on relevant tribunal decisions and Board Circular No. 112/6/2009-ST. The Tribunal noted that once Service Tax payment is not disputed, the exporter is entitled to a refund under the notification. It further emphasized that procedural violations by the service provider should be addressed separately from the refund process.

The Tribunal referenced the case of Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd., where it was held that undisputed Service Tax payments entitle the assessee to a refund under Notification No. 41/2007. Additionally, in the case of Ramdev Food Products (P.) Ltd., it was established that services taxed as port services during collection should be treated the same way when granting refunds. The Tribunal highlighted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed refunds for CHA services in subsequent proceedings for the same appellant. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief, emphasizing the entitlement to refunds based on undisputed Service Tax payments for export-related services under Notification No. 41/2007-ST.