2018 (4) TMI 1332 - AT - Service Tax

Refund claim - Service Tax paid on the services used for export - N/N. 17/2009-ST dated 07.07.2009 - Held that - an identical issue in the assessee - Appellants own case, M/s. Bhansali International Versus C.C.E. Jaipur-II 2017 (7) TMI 1109 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , for the earlier period, has come up for consideration before the Tribunal, where the refund was allowed - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim of Service Tax paid on services used for export under Notification No. 17/2009 - ST dated 07.07.2009 rejected by authorities below.

Analysis:
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi heard an appeal filed by the assessee against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur - II, for the period of October to December 2011. The assessee had filed a refund claim for Service Tax paid on services used for export under Notification No. 17/2009 - ST dated 07.07.2009, which was rejected by the lower authorities. The Tribunal considered an identical issue in the assessee's own case for an earlier period and referred to previous decisions where refund claims were allowed. The Tribunal observed that the refund claim on terminal handling charges, Bill of Entry, etc., was settled in favor of the appellant based on previous decisions. The Tribunal also noted that the refund claim for CHA services was rejected due to the absence of a license number and copy of the license, but since the service tax had been paid by the service provider and invoices were available, the refund claim was allowed. Additionally, the refund of service tax paid on commission was rejected citing an exemption notification, but the Tribunal held that since the tax had been paid despite the exemption, the refund could not be denied. The Tribunal followed its earlier order and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.

This judgment highlights the importance of previous decisions in similar cases, where refund claims were allowed, to support the appellant's case. The Tribunal emphasized the availability of invoices and payment of service tax by the service provider as crucial factors in determining the eligibility for a refund. Moreover, the Tribunal's reliance on legal provisions and decisions, such as exemption notifications and court rulings, demonstrates a comprehensive analysis of the legal aspects involved in the case. The judgment showcases the Tribunal's adherence to legal principles and precedents to ensure a fair and just outcome in matters concerning tax refunds and exemptions.