2013 (4) TMI 201 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of service tax under the provisions of Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 7.7.2009 denied - claim of service tax paid on scientific testing services - Held that - The amount in dispute is only to the extent of 4.14 lakhs in three appeals in respect of scientific testing of their products. The only deficiency is that they are not able to establish the correlation between the samples tested and each consignment that was exported. As find that against item 3 of the table annexed to Notification 17/2009 providing for refund of service tax paid on technical testing and analysis there is no condition imposed in column (4) of the table and that being the case there is no need to insist on the type of co-relation being insisted upon by Revenue. Rail freight issued by CONCOR - Held that - The goods have been taken to ICD is not disputed. The container numbers are also shown to reasonably establish that the service was in respect of export of goods. In this case refund is authorized as per item 7 in the table to the Notification. A1l what is required is that the invoice issued by the exporter should indicate that the goods were exported through the ICD concerned. There is no case made out that such condition is not met. Thus no reason to deny refund in respect of this service either. CHA service - Held that - The appellants have submitted a list of shipping bill numbers for which the amounts involved were charged by the CHA. The refund in respect of this service is governed by item 11 in the Table to the Notification. The deficiency is that the bills raised by the CHA do not show the shipping bill numbers and date and the full requirements of the above conditions are not met. The reason given in the impugned order is that copies of shipping bills are not produced. No such condition is prescribed against S. No. 11. The exporter has given a detailed worksheet showing the shipping Bill Numbers to which each bill of CHA relates. The issue appears to be that the CHA has been raising one bill in respect of many shipping bills. There is nothing unusual about it. Since the CHA may not be aware of this requirement of the exporter, such bills were not issued and exporter might not have obtained such bills. This is a curable defect. The appellant may get the worksheet prepared by them countersigned by the concerned CHA and also furnish information as required in the condition as above. Subject to meeting the above requirement the refund in respect of this service also is allowed. Appeal in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Refund of service tax paid on scientific testing services, CHA services, and rail freight for export activity.

Scientific Testing Services:
The appellant, a manufacturer of cotton terry towels, exports goods and claimed a refund of service tax paid on certain services under Notification No. 17/2009-ST. The adjudicating authority refused the refund for scientific testing services, citing a lack of correlation between tested samples and exported consignments. The appellant argued that testing is done both in India and abroad, and the bill does not show shipping details. The Commissioner (Appeals) raised a procedural objection regarding a Chartered Accountant's certificate. The Appellate Tribunal noted that the Notification did not impose conditions on correlation, allowing the refund for scientific testing services.

Rail Freight Services:
The adjudicating authority objected to the refund claim for rail freight, stating issues with receipts and correlation with exported consignments. The Appellate Tribunal found that the goods were transported to ICD, and container numbers indicated the service was for export. Refund was authorized as per the relevant item in the Notification, as the invoice showed goods exported through the ICD, meeting the conditions for refund.

CHA Services:
For CHA services, the appellant provided a list of shipping bill numbers charged by the CHA, but the bills did not show shipping details. The Tribunal noted the conditions for refund under the Notification, requiring specific invoice details from the CHA. The Tribunal found a deficiency in the bills not showing shipping details, but considered it a curable defect. The appellant was instructed to prepare a worksheet with shipping bill numbers and fulfill the conditions for refund, allowing the refund for CHA services upon meeting the specified requirements.

Conclusion:
The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside lower authorities' orders and ordering refunds for the disputed amounts, subject to fulfilling the specified conditions for each service category.