9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 759 - AT - Central Excise100% EOU - Refund claim - cleaning service - insurance auxiliary service - scope of SCN - inclusion of value of the deemed exports in calculating the amount of refund - Held that - the supplies to EOU during the relevant time was considered as deemed exports which is equal to physical exports and the assessee is entitled to CENVAT credit under Rule 5 and also eligible for refund - the CENVAT credit with regard to input services of cleaning and insurance auxiliary service, which was availed against office equipments, burglary, money in safe, employee fidelity has nexus with the manufacturing activities, and refund is allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues:
- Refund eligibility for consulting engineer service, courier service, legal consultancy service, cleaning service, and insurance auxiliary service. - Inclusion of deemed exports in refund calculation. - Appeal against the Order-in-Original. - Cross-objection regarding cleaning service and insurance auxiliary service. Refund Eligibility for Various Services: The case involved a dispute over the refund eligibility of consulting engineer service, courier service, legal consultancy service, cleaning service, and insurance auxiliary service. The Commissioner(Appeals) allowed the refund for some services while denying it for others. The Department filed an appeal challenging this decision. The Tribunal considered the nexus of these services with manufacturing activities. It was argued that supplies to EOU and deemed exports are part of the export turnover under Rule 5 of CCR and are eligible for refund. Various decisions were cited to support this argument. The Tribunal found that supplies to EOU during the relevant time were considered as deemed exports, making the assessee entitled to CENVAT credit and refund. Additionally, the Tribunal held that input services like cleaning and insurance auxiliary service had a nexus with manufacturing activities, as supported by previous decisions, leading to the dismissal of the Department's appeal. Inclusion of Deemed Exports in Refund Calculation: The Department contended that allowing the refund for supplies to EOU as deemed exports was not sustainable in law, emphasizing the distinction between deemed exports and physical exports. However, the Tribunal disagreed, stating that supplies to EOU during the relevant period were considered as deemed exports, equivalent to physical exports, making the assessee eligible for CENVAT credit under Rule 5 and entitled to a refund. The Tribunal relied on various decisions to support this conclusion. Appeal Against the Order-in-Original: The Department filed an appeal against the Order-in-Original, which partially sanctioned the refund claim but disallowed certain amounts based on the application of the formula stipulated under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. The Tribunal, after considering submissions from both parties and examining the records, found no merit in the Department's appeal and dismissed it. Cross-objection Regarding Cleaning Service and Insurance Auxiliary Service: The assessee filed a cross-objection against the rejection of the refund for cleaning service and insurance auxiliary service. The Tribunal allowed the cross-objection, stating that these services had a nexus with manufacturing activities, as established by previous decisions. The Tribunal upheld the definition of input service as held in various decisions, leading to the dismissal of the Department's appeal and the allowance of the assessee's cross-objection. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the refund eligibility for deemed exports and input services like cleaning and insurance auxiliary service, dismissing the Department's appeal and allowing the assessee's cross-objection based on established legal precedents and the nexus of these services with manufacturing activities.
|
