2018 (6) TMI 812 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit - Export of services - Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 readwith N/N. 27/2012-CE (NT) dated 18/06/2012 - Held that - The exporter has fulfilled the substantial conditions of the N/N. 27/2012-CE (NT) readwith Rule 5 and therefore the refund for accumulated Cenvat credits under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 need to be refunded to them - Since substantial condition of Rule 5 and N/N. 27/2012-CE (NT) has been fulfilled by the exporter namely M/s Xander Advisors India Pvt. Ltd. refund is to be allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claims under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18/06/2012.

Analysis:
The case involved the assessee filing four refund claims under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, with the Original Adjudicating Authority sanctioning the refund claim after disallowing certain portions. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the full refund claim of ?9,65,873/- to the assessee against the four refund claims. The Department appealed this decision, arguing that certain conditions of Rule 5 and Notification 27/2012-CE(NT) were not fulfilled by the exporter/assessee. The Tribunal examined the matter, noting that the assessee utilized input services for providing business support services fully exported out of India, resulting in unutilized Cenvat credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the assessee in substantial compliance with the requirements of Rule 5 and Notification 27/2012, leading to the full refund approval. The Tribunal upheld the order-in-appeal, stating that it adequately analyzed all requirements of Rule 5 and Notification 27/2012, finding no deficiency.

Moreover, the Tribunal referenced a previous case involving the same assessee, where it was held that the exporter fulfilled the substantial conditions of Notification 27/2012-CE(NT) read with Rule 5, entitling them to the refund for accumulated Cenvat credits. The Tribunal highlighted that the appellant exported the entire output service outside India, making them eligible for the refund under Rule 5. The Tribunal noted that previous judgments allowed refund claims on similar facts, emphasizing compliance with Rule 5. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that since the exporter fulfilled substantial conditions of Rule 5 and Notification 27/2012-CE(NT), there was no flaw in the Commissioner (Appeals) order, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

In summary, the Tribunal's judgment centered on the refund claims under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and Notification 27/2012-CE(NT). The decision highlighted the exporter's compliance with the conditions, emphasizing substantial fulfillment of Rule 5 requirements for the refund approval. The Tribunal's analysis underscored the importance of meeting regulatory criteria for refund claims, referencing past judgments to support the decision. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order, dismissing the Revenue's appeal based on the exporter's adherence to Rule 5 and Notification 27/2012-CE(NT) conditions.