9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 876X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant has not produced the payment of proof of payment of service tax - Held that: - As the invoices of the above services are on record showing payment of service tax. In that circumstances, on this ground refund claims cannot be rejected to the appellant. Refund claim - Road Transport Service - denial on the ground that there is no co-relation of invoices issued by the service provider or the goods transporter - Held that: - the adjudicating authority is directed to verify the documents for the service received by the appellants and corresponding invoice of service provided by the goods transporter and to ascertain the fact, whether the invoices produced by the appellants are for transportation of goods their factory to the port ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the appellants have claimed duty drawback: I find that as per the observations by the Director of Drawback, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, which has clarified that while calculating the amount of drawback, the component of input service has not been considered, therefore, the services received by the assessee for export of goods are not covered under duty drawback claim. The said view has been taken by this Tribunal in the case of Mittal Interntional reported in 2017 (3) TMI 1512- CESTAT CHANDIGARH wherein this Tribunal observed as under: 4. The case of the Revenue is that as the appellants have claimed drawback on export of the goods, therefore, they are not entitled for refund claim on the services used in export ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, documentation charges, bill of lading charges are the services in the nature of logistics services, therefore, they are covered under the business support service and are not entitled for availment of the benefit of Notification No.41/2007-ST as business support services are not eligible for refund claim. 14. I find that the said issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Sopariwalal Exports-2015 (39) STR 884 (Tri.-Mum.) wherein this Tribunal has observed as under: 6. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the refund was denied to the Appellant mainly on various procedural grounds as stated hereinabove. Be that as it may, as regards refund for THC on the grounds such as invoice being raised by shipping line ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
