9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been provided under the notification, which is - Central Board of Excise and Customs has clearly clarified that these services, which are rendered for the export of goods, refund is eligible under Notification 41/2007-ST. The only ground of appeal which has been raised by the departmental authorities is that the said services would not fall under the categories listed under Notification 41/2007-ST. In our considered view, the issue is no more res integra as the hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. AIA Engineering Pvt. Ltd. [2015 (1) TMI 1044 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], on similar situation has held in favour of the assessee. This Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur vs. Prata ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal orders and allowing the refund claims filed by the assessee. 4. On perusal of the records, we find that the first appellate authority has recorded the following reasons for setting aside the adjudicating authority s orders and allowed the refund claims filed by the assessee: 4.0 I have gone through the case records including record of PH and citations relied upon by the appellant. From the brief facts narrated above, it is seen that the refund amount has been rejected on different grounds / different situations. Therefore, I take each ground one by one for discussion - (a) As per the ground of appeals, an amount of ₹ 10,35,103/- has been rejected on the ground that the services viz. Business Support Services and Busines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he receives and uses for export do not require verification of registration certificate of the supplier of service. Therefore, refund should be granted in such cases, if otherwise in order. The procedural violations by the service provider need to be dealt separately, independent of the process of refund. 4.1 From the above clarification, it is very clear that the refund is payable on the taxable services which the exporter receives and uses for export. Further it has been clarified that the procedural violation by the service provider in the instant case the service provider is registered under Business Support Service or Business Auxiliary Service, (as the case may be) needs to be dealt with separately, independent of the process ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings recorded by the first appellate authority that the Central Board of Excise and Customs has clearly clarified that these services, which are rendered for the export of goods, refund is eligible under Notification 41/2007-ST. The only ground of appeal which has been raised by the departmental authorities is that the said services would not fall under the categories listed under Notification 41/2007-ST. In our considered view, the issue is no more res integra as the hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. AIA Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 2014 (36) STR 1236 (Guj.), on similar situation has held in favour of the assessee. This Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur vs. Pratap Re-Rol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
