2015 (1) TMI 229 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - export of performance based service - Scientific Testing and Consulting Services. - refund claim filed for refund of credit taken on the ground that assessee could not utilize the services because of export of service - denial on the ground that appellants had not claimed the refund quarter wise and the documents listed therein had not been submitted - Held that - Services came under Rule 3(1)(2) (sic) of the Rules. It is very much clear that the performance of the service is not complete until the testing and analysis report is delivered to its client. In the present case, when such reports were delivered to the clients outside India it amounts to taxable service partly performed outside India. The performance of testing and analysing has no value unless and until it is delivered to its client and the service is to be complete when such report is delivered to its client. Thus, delivery of report to its client is an essential part of the service report was delivered outside India and same was used outside India. This is not the disputed fact. We hold that the respondent satisfied the conditions of Rule 3(2) and accordingly the respondents are eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 11/2007-S.T. dated 1-3-2007. - Matter remanded back.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Eligibility of the appellant for refund claim on the ground of export of service.
2. Interpretation of Export of Services Rules, 2005 and its application to the case.
3. Nexus of input services with the output service.

Issue 1: Eligibility for refund claim on the ground of export of service:
The Appellate Tribunal considered the appeal of both the Revenue and the assessee, focusing on the eligibility of the appellant, a 100% EOU-STP unit providing Scientific Testing and Consulting Services, for a refund claim. The appellant filed a refund claim due to the inability to utilize services because of the export of service. The Tribunal noted that the service provided by the appellant was not initially considered as export. However, the appellant relied on a specific case law to support their claim that the services rendered indeed amounted to export of service. The Tribunal found this reliance appropriate and held that the appellant was eligible for the benefit, emphasizing the importance of delivering the testing and analysis report to the client outside India as a crucial part of the service. The Tribunal concluded that the service provided by the appellant qualified as an export of service, thus entitling them to the benefit.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Export of Services Rules, 2005:
The Tribunal delved into the interpretation and application of the Export of Services Rules, 2005 in the context of the case. Referring to the specific provisions of the Rules, the Tribunal highlighted that the performance of the taxable service was not complete until the testing and analysis report was delivered to the client outside India. Emphasizing that the delivery of the report outside India and its use outside India were essential components, the Tribunal concluded that the service provided by the appellant was partly performed outside India, meeting the conditions of Rule 3(2) of the Rules. By delivering the report to the clients outside India, the appellant satisfied the requirements for the service to be considered as an export of service, thereby making them eligible for exemption under the relevant Notification. The Tribunal upheld this interpretation, rejecting the arguments against it and affirming the eligibility of the appellant for the exemption.

Issue 3: Nexus of input services with the output service:
Regarding the nexus of input services with the output service, the Tribunal indicated that this issue had been addressed in previous interim orders. The Tribunal directed the lower authority to reconsider this issue in light of the observations made in the interim orders. The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' stand on this issue, emphasizing the need for fresh consideration based on the Tribunal's observations. The matter was remanded for a fresh assessment, allowing both the Revenue's appeal and the appellant's appeal by way of remand. The Tribunal instructed the original authority to decide the issue in accordance with the Tribunal's observations in the interim orders, providing guidance for the further proceedings.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE covers the eligibility of the appellant for a refund claim, the interpretation of Export of Services Rules, 2005, and the nexus of input services with the output service, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues addressed in the judgment.