2012 (12) TMI 915 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of refund claim - Place of removal - whether refund of service tax paid on CHA service in respect of export of goods is admissible or not - Held that - In terms of Board Circular dated 23/08/2007 relied upon by the Commissioner (A) as well as decisions of this Tribunal, in the case of export of goods, place of removal has to be considered as port of export - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Whether refund of service tax paid on CHA service in respect of export of goods is admissible or not.

Analysis:
1. The issue in this appeal is whether the refund of service tax paid on CHA service for the export of goods is permissible. The Commissioner (A) relied on various precedents and circulars to support the eligibility of the service tax credit for CHA services related to manufacturing activities. The Commissioner also discussed the concept of place of removal and referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a specific case to differentiate between inputs and input services. Additionally, the Commissioner cited a previous decision of the Tribunal to establish the admissibility of service tax credit for CHA services on exported goods.

2. The Appellant argued that the service of CHA is not connected to the manufacturer as it is a post-removal activity. The Respondent's Advocate, on the other hand, relied on multiple Tribunal decisions affirming the admissibility of service tax credit on CHA services for exported goods. The Tribunal considered the arguments from both sides and reviewed previous decisions on the admissibility of service tax credit on CHA services. The Tribunal listed several cases where it was held that such refunds are admissible, reinforcing the position that credits for CHA services on exported goods are permissible.

3. The Tribunal addressed the objections raised by the Revenue, noting that these objections had already been addressed in previous Tribunal decisions. Based on the Board Circular and precedents, the Tribunal clarified that for the export of goods, the port of export should be considered as the place of removal. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and rejected it, affirming the admissibility of service tax credit for CHA services on exported goods.

In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad upheld the admissibility of the refund of service tax paid on CHA services for the export of goods, based on established precedents and interpretations of relevant legal provisions and circulars.