2014 (3) TMI 303 - AT - Service Tax

Denial of refund claim - Export made under drawback claim - Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 06/10/2007 - Held that - appellant has violated the conditions stipulated in Notification No.41/2007-ST, as regards the non-availment of draw back on export of goods. Whether the claim is made in a routine manner or otherwise, it does not make any difference - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claims rejection based on export for draw back under Notification No.41/2007-ST.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with the rejection of three refund claims by the lower appellate authority for the period July 2008 to September 2008, totaling Rs.23,201. The rejection was based on the grounds that the appellant exported goods under claim for draw back, rendering them ineligible for the refund as per clause (e) of the proviso to Notification No.41/2007-ST. The appellant contended that they never filed a draw back claim for service tax on export of goods and that their drawback claim was routine, making them eligible for the refund. However, the Ld. AR for the Revenue argued that the appellant violated the conditions related to non-availment of drawback, justifying the rejection of the refund claim.

The appellate tribunal, after considering the submissions, found that the appellant had indeed violated the conditions specified in Notification No.41/2007-ST regarding the non-availment of draw back on the export of goods. The tribunal emphasized that whether the claim was made routinely or not was immaterial, as the violation of conditions remained. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants, deeming them devoid of merits. The judgment underscores the importance of strict adherence to statutory conditions and regulations, emphasizing that even routine practices cannot excuse non-compliance with legal requirements.

In conclusion, the judgment highlights the significance of complying with statutory provisions and conditions, emphasizing that even routine actions cannot justify violations of legal requirements. The decision serves as a reminder for taxpayers to ensure strict adherence to regulations to avoid the risk of claim rejections and legal repercussions.