9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 652 - AT - Service Tax100% EOU - refund claim - export of services - Information & Technology software service - Business Auxiliary Services - Business support services - Held that - the credit on input services of all the services as mentioned, are eligible to be refunded and there is no dispute as to the documentation of the same as also the appellant being an exporter of output services - In an identical issue in respect of same assessee, as also other assessee, this Tribunal has held that refund needs to be sanctioned - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues: Refund of service tax paid by service provider for export of services, denial of refund by lower authorities, eligibility of Cenvat Credit on input services.
Refund of Service Tax Paid for Export of Services: The appellant, a 100% EOU exporting Information & Technology software services, Business Auxiliary Services, and Business support services, claimed refund of unutilized credits on various services. The lower authorities denied the refund, leading to the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the appellant's export status and utilization of services for export were undisputed. Eligibility of Cenvat Credit: The appellant claimed Cenvat Credit on input services, which was denied by the lower authorities. The Tribunal, after considering similar cases and orders, held that the credit on input services for all the listed services was eligible for refund. The Tribunal found the Commissioner's findings incorrect and set aside the impugned order, stating that there was no dispute regarding documentation and the appellant's status as an exporter of output services. Judgment: The Tribunal accepted the appeal, setting aside the order that denied the refund claim for Cenvat Credit on various services. The Tribunal found that the appellant was eligible for the refund based on previous Tribunal decisions and the appellant's status as an exporter. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellant.
|
