2018 (6) TMI 811 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of service tax paid - services used in the export of their various export consignments - denial on the ground that the appellant/assessee is not registered with the Export Promotion Counsel which is the basic requirement under the Provision 2 (i) (B) of the N/N. 17/2009-ST dated 07/07/2009 readwith Section 11B of CEA 1944 - Held that - Since, the required registration-cum-membership certificate has been produced before us and we find a mention of the same in para (viii) of the order-in-appeal dated 28.3.2014/19.3.2014 which proves that the appellant has fulfilled the condition of N/N. 17/2009 dated 07/07/2009 with regard to registration is concerned - matter remanded back to the Original Adjudicating Authority i.e. Assistant Commissioner to re-adjudicate the matter with the direction that he will consider the registration with the Federation of Indian Export Organization RCMC No. 527/07-08 dated 08/11/2007 (renewed subsequently up-to-date) and undertake a fresh adjudication of the refund claim of the appellant after giving him the proper opportunity of hearing - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim rejection based on lack of registration with Export Promotion Council.

Analysis:
The appellant, a merchant exporter, filed a refund claim for service tax paid on various services used in export consignments. The claim was rejected as the appellant was not registered with the Export Promotion Council, a requirement under Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated 07/07/2009. The Assistant Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection. However, the appellant produced evidence of registration-cum-membership with the Federation of Indian Export Organizations, fulfilling the registration requirement. The Tribunal noted the registration certificate and remanded the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh adjudication, directing consideration of the registration and giving the appellant a proper opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, emphasizing the appellant's right to address other issues in the refund claim before the Original Adjudicating Authority within 60 days of the order.

This judgment highlights the importance of fulfilling specific requirements for refund claims, such as registration with relevant authorities. It underscores the need for proper documentation and evidence to support refund claims, as demonstrated by the appellant's successful appeal based on the production of the registration-cum-membership certificate. The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for fresh adjudication emphasizes the principle of providing a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case and address any issues raised in the refund claim rejection. The judgment serves as a reminder of the procedural aspects involved in handling refund claims and the significance of compliance with statutory provisions for successful outcomes in such cases.