2024 (1) TMI 181 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of Service Tax paid - denial of refund/rebate on the ground that difference between amount of rebate under the prescribed procedure is less than 20% of the rebate available - arguments of appellant escaped detailed scrutiny - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It was the contention of appellant that in the instant matter, they were claiming benefit under condition para 3 of the proviso to the notification and the computation indicated by them which is part of the show cause notice under para 5 indicated that they were entitled to rebate of 2,80,506/- in any case. However, this factum is not been considered and pronounced upon by the lower authority and the whole claim amounting to Rs. 3, 07,119/- was rejected in Toto. On the ground that para 2 is required to be considered by the customs authority and not the Central Excise. The appellant on the other hand also maintained that they were claiming under para 3 and in any case there is no constraint to claim either through customs or excise authorities in the notification. It therefore is clear that the argument advanced by them has escaped detail scrutiny by the lower authorities and are required to be pronounced in the light of the stated position. Considering that there is no constraint as has been highlighted, of either the matter being required to be dealt with by the customs authority or Excise and also there is nothing to show that para 3 under which the appellants are claiming the refund in the instant case is not applicable, on prima facie considerations, the matter deserves to be remitted back to the original authority. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issue involves the refund of Service Tax paid for export goods as per Notification No. 41/2012-ST dated 29.06.2012, specifically focusing on the condition "C" regarding the rebate calculation.

Summary:

Issue 1: Interpretation of Condition "C" for Rebate Calculation
The appellant contended that the rebate should only be disallowed if the difference between the rebate amounts under prescribed procedures in paragraphs 2 and 3 is less than 20% of the total rebate available. They argued that they were entitled to a rebate of Rs. 2,80,506, but the lower authority rejected their entire claim of Rs. 3,07,119, stating that para 2 should be considered by customs authorities, not Central Excise. The appellant maintained that they were claiming under para 3 and there was no restriction on claiming through either customs or excise authorities. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities did not scrutinize this argument properly and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication.

Decision:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, considering that there is no constraint on whether customs or Excise authorities should handle the matter and that para 3, under which the appellants claimed the refund, is applicable in this case. The matter was deemed to deserve reconsideration by the original authority.

Note:
The judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Member (Judicial) Mr. Somesh Arora.