9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces exported during the quarter for which claim is made can be refunded as there is no bar in Notification No. 5/2006 C. E. (N. T.). The issue has been considered in CCE, Mysore vs. Chamundi Textiles (Silk Mills) limited [2011 (3) TMI 193 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] and Amdocs Business Services Pvt. Ltd. [2013 (9) TMI 31 - CESTAT MUMBAI] wherein it was held that the refund can be allowed of credit accumulated in the past period and claimed in a subsequent quarter . Therefore, in terms of the Board Circular stated above and also the decisions of the tribunal in Chamundi Textiles (Silk Mills) Ltd. and Am Docs Business Services (P) Ltd., (supra), I am of the view that the impugned order is unsustainable. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pees twelve lakh sixty eight thousand seven hundred thirty seven only) paid on input services during the period July 2011 to October 2011. On scrutiny of the invoices it was observed that appellants have filed claim for the quarter January 2012 to March 2012 and had submitted invoices dated 12.8.2011, 30.9.2011, 13.9.2011, 08,10,2011 and 31.7.2011. The export billing showed export of services on 28.03.2012. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim holding that no refund of Cenvat credit is admissible to the party in terms of Notification No. 05/2006 CE (N T) dated 14/03/2006 read with Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant filed appeal before The Commissioner (Appeals) who dismissed the appeal confirming the rejectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cular No. 120/01/2010 S.T.dated 19/01/2010, which is reproduced below; 3. 3 quarterly refund claims[para (d) about]; As regards the quarterly filing of refund claims and its applicability, since no bar is provided in the notification, there should not be any objection in allowing refund of credit of the past period in subsequent quarters. It is possible that during certain quarters, there may not be any exports and therefore the exporter does not file any claim. However, he receives inputs/input services during this period. To illustrate, an exporter may avail of ₹ 1 crore as input credit in the April-June quarter. However, no exports may be made in this quarter, so no refund is claimed. The input credit is thus carried ove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the credit of the same as input service under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. As the appellants could not utilise the said credit, they filed the refund claim for the amount of ₹ 12, 68, 7 37/ .The ground on which the refund is denied is that the accumulated input service credit did not pertain to the period during which output services were exported for which the refund claim is made. The appellant has filed the claim on 27.7.2012 for the quarter January 2012 to March 2012. The invoices dated 08/12/2011, 30/09/2011, 13/09/2011, 10/08/2011 and 31/07/2011 which are prior to the claim period were submitted. The appellant got registration of Business Support Service on 13/03/2012. The export billing shows that services were exported on 28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
