9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of service. It has been held that the service provided by the appellant cannot be considered as export. Learned counsel submits that while taking this decision, the authorities have travelled beyond the show-cause notice since in the show-cause notice the proposal was to deny refund only on the ground that appellants had not claimed the refund quarter wise and the documents listed therein had not been submitted. He also relied upon the decision in the case of CST, Ahmedabad Vs. B.A. Research India Ltd. [2010 (18) S.T.R. 439 (Tri.-Ahmd.)] to support the submission that the services rendered by them amounts to export of service. As regards the first submission that the authorities have travelled beyond the show-cause notice, we consider tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) The provision of any taxable service [specified in sub-rule (1)]* shall be treated as export of service when the following conditions are satisfied, namely:- (a) such service is delivered outside [provided from]* India and used outside India; and (b) payment for such service [provided outside India]* is received by the service provider in convertible foreign exchange. *[added or substituted w.e.f. 1-3-2007] #{deleted w.e.f. 1-6-2007} Reading of the above provisions of Export of Services Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') makes it amply clear that the taxable service specified in sub-clause (zzh) of Clause (105) of Section 65 of the Act is covered under Rule 3(1)(ii) of the Rules. The performance is not complete unt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is delivered to its client and the service is to be complete when such report is delivered to its client. Thus, delivery of report to its client is an essential part of the service report was delivered outside India and same was used outside India. This is not the disputed fact. We hold that the respondent satisfied the conditions of Rule 3(2) and accordingly the respondents are eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 11/2007-S.T. dated 1-3-2007. We do not find any force in the argument made by the learned DR. With this observation, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. Stay petition is also disposed off accordingly. 2. Since the issue is covered by the decision of this Tribunal, the stan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
