2022 (2) TMI 547 - AT - Service Tax

Maintainability of appeal - power of learned Commissioner (A) to remand the case - said remand was only to the extent of quantification of refund on the services - learned Commissioner (A) had held to be eligible for refund - HELD THAT - It is found that it is an open remand to the original authority while making it clear that no opinion is expressed on any of the issues and nexus issue in respect of the input services on which refund has been claimed will be considered afresh and for those input services that have been allowed by the Commissioner (A) Revenue is not in appeal. The appeals filed by the department is on two grounds one is that the commissioner (A) has no power to remand and the other ground is that nexus between input services and services exported is not established. However we find that Revenue has not filed any appeal against the final order of this Bench on the issue of nexus between certain input services and the export services which have been allowed by the Commissioner (A) - the Commissioner (A) remanded the case to the Original Authority for the purpose of quantification only. The department s appeal on the issue of Commissioner (A) s having no power of remand is not maintainable for two reasons that in the instant case the impugned order is not a case of normal remand but was only for the limited purposes of quantification - the appeals filed by the department are not maintainable hence they are dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the remand order made by the Commissioner is valid.
2. Whether the nexus between input services and services exported is established.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Validity of the Remand Order
The department contended that the remand order by the Commissioner was not a normal remand but was limited to the quantification of refund on eligible services. The Tribunal examined judicial precedents, such as the Madras High Court case of A. S. Babu Sah Designs vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and the Tribunal case of Commissioner of Service Tax vs. KBACE Technologies Pvt. Ltd., which affirmed the Commissioner's power of remand. The Tribunal found that the remand was open to the original authority and clarified that no opinion was expressed on the issues. The Tribunal concluded that the department's appeal on the Commissioner's power of remand was not maintainable as the impugned order was specifically for quantification purposes and not a normal remand.

Issue 2: Nexus between Input Services and Exported Services
The department raised concerns regarding the establishment of nexus between input services and services exported. However, the Tribunal noted that the Revenue did not appeal against the Commissioner's decision on the nexus issue for certain input services that were allowed for refund. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner remanded the case solely for quantification purposes. As the department failed to provide any evidence against the Tribunal's order regarding the respondent's appeals, the Tribunal found the department's appeals to be not maintainable. Consequently, the appeals filed by the department were dismissed by the Tribunal on the grounds of lack of maintainability.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the validity of the remand order made by the Commissioner and found that the appeals filed by the department were not maintainable due to the specific nature of the remand and the lack of appeal against the nexus issue.