Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2022 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (7) TMI 822 - AT - Service Tax


Issues involved:
Whether the appellant is entitled to a refund of service tax paid on ocean freight on the ground of Cenvat credit and cash refund under Section 142(3) read with Section 11B.

Analysis:

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Raju, Member (Technical), addressed the issue of entitlement to a refund of service tax paid on ocean freight. The appellant claimed the refund based on being entitled to Cenvat credit of service tax paid on ocean freight, seeking cash refund under Section 142(3) read with Section 11B. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and noted that a similar issue was addressed in the case of Galaxy Poly Plast Industries, where the matter was remanded for further review. The Tribunal highlighted that the lower authorities had rejected the refund claim on the grounds that cash refund of Cenvat credit of service tax paid on ocean freight was not admissible. Referring to a specific case involving Bosch Electrical Drive India Private Limited, the Tribunal decided not to pass an order on the cash refund of Cenvat credit under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's claim was based on the argument of entitlement to a refund of service tax paid on ocean freight, distinct from the issue of the legality of the service tax levy itself. As the matter regarding the levy of service tax on ocean freight was not examined by the lower authorities and the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was not considered, the Tribunal remanded the case to the original authority for further review, following the precedent set in the Galaxy Poly Plast Industries case. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the open court by the presiding Member.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates