9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 720X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Accountant to the effect that the remittances were received. Further, I find that when the service was rendered, there was no objection by the department that the said service is not an export of service and they have raised the objection only when the refund was claimed. Further, I find that the allegation that FIRCs only talks about advance and thus, the correlation cannot be done is untenable when the exporter has declared that FIRCs are towards the export effected and that the foreign inward remittances has been received, which is not in question or doubt - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/23721-23724/2014-SM, ST/23730/2014-SM - 22834-22838/2017 - Dated:- 20-11-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und of service tax paid on input service used in the export of software for the various periods mentioned in the table given above. Thereafter, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellant to reject the refund claims on various grounds. After following the due process, the adjudicating authority rejected the refunds on the ground that the FIRCs contains an address different from that of claimant STPI and also the FIRCs records the remittances received as advance and therefore, the receipt of remittances cannot be correlated. Therefore, the appellant have not satisfied the conditions prescribed under Rule 3(2) of Export of Service Rules, 2005. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeals before the Commissioner (A), who also uphel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en the claimant has declared that the remittances are received and accounted in their books as having received such remittances. He also submitted that both the authorities have not accepted the expert s evidence in the form of Chartered Accountant, who has certified that the remittances were received. He further submitted that it is not possible to establish one to one correlation of the invoices. 6. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that the correlation statement has not been furnished and the one to one correlation has not been proved or established. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that it is not the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
