2017 (5) TMI 105 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - commission agent service - N/N. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 - case of Revenue is that the respondent has not paid service tax being service recipient from the service provider before filing refund claim, therefore, they are not entitled for refund under N/N. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 - Held that - it is not disputed that the respondent has paid service tax on the service on foreign commission agent provided to them, in that circumstance, the refund claim of service tax paid to the foreign commission agent for export of the goods under N/N. 41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007 cannot be denied - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim on commission agent service under Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal by the Revenue against an order allowing a refund claim on commission agent service for the export of goods under Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007. The respondent initially filed a refund claim for a specific period, which was partially sanctioned by the adjudicating authority based on evidence provided for payment of service tax. The Commissioner (Appeals) further allowed the refund claim on production of proof of service tax payment, but the Revenue contested this decision.

The main contention raised by the learned AR was that the respondent did not pay service tax as a service recipient from the service provider before filing the refund claim, thereby questioning their entitlement to the refund under the aforementioned notification. After hearing both parties and considering the submissions, it was noted that the respondent had indeed paid service tax on the service provided by the foreign commission agent for the export of goods.

Given that it was undisputed that the respondent had paid service tax on the foreign commission agent service, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order allowing the refund claim under Notification No.41/2007-ST dated 6.10.2007. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.

This judgment highlights the importance of complying with the specified requirements for claiming a refund under relevant notifications and the significance of providing evidence of service tax payment to support refund claims. The decision underscores the need for thorough documentation and adherence to legal provisions when seeking refunds in service tax matters.