2015 (2) TMI 191 - AT - Service Tax

Denial of refund claim - Non fulfillment of condition of Notification 41/2007 - Held that - In the invoice produced by the CHA there is a description of the goods, therefore, the appellant has fulfilled the condition of Notification 41/07. Further, it is not in dispute that the appellant has not exported the goods and not received the consideration for the same. Therefore, as held by the Tribunal in the case of Indoworth (India) Ltd. (2011 (6) TMI 311 - CESTAT, MUMBAI) the refund claim cannot be denied on the sole ground that agreement between the foreign buyer and the appellant has not been produced. - appellant is entitled for refund claim - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Refusal of refund claim based on non-fulfillment of conditions under Notification 41/2007.

Analysis:
The appellant contested the rejection of their refund claim, arguing that the receipt of remuneration for the exported goods was not in dispute, and therefore, the absence of the agreement between the overseas buyer and the appellant should not be a reason for denial, citing the Indoworth (India) Ltd. case. They also pointed out that the invoice from the Customs House Agent (CHA) contained the necessary description of the goods. The Tribunal examined the records and found that the CHA's invoice did include the goods' description, satisfying the Notification 41/07 condition. Additionally, it was established that the goods were exported, and payment was received, aligning with the findings in the Indoworth (India) Ltd. case. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that they were entitled to the refund claim. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

This judgment primarily revolved around the interpretation and application of Notification 41/2007 conditions concerning the export of goods. The Tribunal emphasized that the fulfillment of these conditions, particularly the production of the agreement with the overseas buyer and the description of goods in the invoice, was crucial for refund claims. However, the Tribunal clarified that the absence of the agreement should not be a sole reason for denial if other evidences, such as the receipt of remuneration and the description of goods in the invoice, support the export transaction. The decision in the Indoworth (India) Ltd. case served as a precedent, guiding the Tribunal's conclusion in this matter. The judgment underscored the importance of substantiating export transactions with necessary documentation and highlighted the significance of considering all relevant factors before rejecting refund claims solely based on technicalities.