2020 (1) TMI 184 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of accumulated Cenvat credit - export of services - case of Revenue is that two invoices were filed beyond the period of limitation - N/N. 27/2012- CE (NT) dt.18.06.2012 - HELD THAT - Para 3(b)(ii) of this notification requires the claims of refunds to be filed before one year from the date of receipt of payment in convertible foreign exchange in cases of export of services. HELD THAT - During hearing before this bench learned Chartered Accountant representing the appellant presented various data but could not show that the foreign exchange in respect of these three invoices were received on any other date other than the dates mentioned above or that the refund claim was filed prior to the date indicated above. The first appellate authority has correctly modified the order of the lower authority only denying the refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of CCR 2004 to the extent the refund claims were filed beyond the period of one year from the date of realisation of foreign exchange in terms of the notification. He did not deny the refund of entire Cenvat credit. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Refund of accumulated Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 for IT services exported in various quarters.

Analysis:
1. The appellants, engaged in providing Information Technology services, filed refund claims for accumulated Cenvat credit for three quarters. The original authority sanctioned refunds for each quarter, but the department appealed against certain amounts filed beyond the limitation period.

2. For the 2nd quarter, the department appealed against the refund granted, stating that claims for three invoices were beyond the limitation period. The first appellate authority upheld the appeal, disallowing the refund for these invoices.

3. In the case of the 3rd quarter, the department appealed again, citing that claims for four invoices exceeded the one-year limitation. The first appellate authority agreed, disallowing the refund for these invoices.

4. The issue centered around the refund of Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004, which allows credit utilization for exported services. The procedure for claiming refunds is detailed in Notification No.27/2012-CE (NT), specifying conditions and limitations.

5. The first appellate authority found that refund claims for certain invoices were filed beyond the one-year period from the receipt of foreign exchange, as required by the notification. The appellant could not provide evidence to dispute these facts.

6. The first appellate authority correctly modified the lower authority's order, denying the refund only for claims exceeding the one-year period from foreign exchange realization. The orders were deemed fair, reasonable, and in accordance with the law, leading to the rejection of the appeals.

7. The impugned orders were upheld, and the appeals were rejected, as per the detailed analysis of the refund claims and the applicable rules and notifications.