9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bill of Lading Services do not fall within the port service and Customs House Agency Service is not covered for refund claim. It was also denied on the ground that the appellant is claiming drawback of duty paid on the export goods, therefore, they are not entitled to the benefit for refund claim. It was also held that the appellant has not fulfilled the condition of Rule 4(A) of the Service Tax Rules, 2006, therefore, they are not entitled to take the refund claim and in one case, the invoices addressed in the name of appellant at karnal unit, as the appellant is located at Gurgaon. 2. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 3. All the issues are dealt as under: (A) Transport of Goods: The refund claim sought to be denied on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the services of Terminal handling Charge and Bill of Lading Charges were not port services, therefore, the refund claim was denied. I find that the said issue came up before this Tribunal and this Tribunal, time and again, held that the services received at port by the appellant is covered under Port Services and it is admitted fact that the Terminal Handling Charges and Bill of lading Charges has been paid at the port by the appellant, therefore, the same are covered under port services. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled for refund claim on Terminal Handling Charges and Bill of Lading Charges as port services. (C) Customs House Agency Service: The case of the Revenue is that that the said service is not covered under the Notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the said issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Shahi Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vide Final Order No. A/60476/2017-SM (BR) dated 21.03.2017 wherein this Tribunal observed as under: 3. Considering the fact that the said issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of M/s Mittal International and others vide Final Order NO. 60416-60459/2017 dated 21.03.2017 wherein this Tribunal held that the drawback Rules are not applicable for the input services received for export of goods which only includes input services used in manufacturing or processing of export goods. Admittedly, the services in question have been received by the appellant after manufacturing of goods and the same is not included while calculating the drawback claim. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant in the course of their export of goods, therefore, the clarification given by the CBEC Circular dated 11.12.2008 has been met out. In that circumstance, the refund claim cannot be denied to the appellant. Further, in one case, the refund claim sought to be denied on the ground that in the invoices, the address of Karnal unit of the appellant has been mentioned. I find that the appellant has produced the certificate issued by the service provider that they have given wrong address of their Karnal unit instead of their unit located at Gurgaon and certified that the services has been provided at their Gurgaon unit, therefore, merely on that ground the invoices have been issued in the name of the Karnal Unit, the refund claim cannot be de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
