9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required. The retainership could be for any service such as consultancy, lawyers, technical experts, etc. Unless the nature of the service rendered is clear and the service tax paid is also clear, it cannot be determined whether the appellant in this case will be entitled to refund of service tax or not - this factual matter which needs to be verified - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No: ST/30396, 30461 & 30473/2018 - A/30728-30730/2018 - Dated:- 27-6-2018 - Mr. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri B. Seshagiri Rao, Advocate for the Appellant. Smt B.V. Siva Naga Kumari, Commissioner/AR for the Respondent. Shri Dass Thavanam, Superintendent/DR for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per: P.VENKATA SU ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t appellate authority held that the appellant could not link up the payment made under business auxiliary services to the relevant invoice and had not even during the appeal, explained what service was received and how it is categorized as scientific and technical consultancy service and why they are arguing that it falls under business auxiliary services. Since the exemption notification is conditional notification, only on fulfilment of the conditions and on satisfaction that the services were consumed wholly within the SEZ unit can the refund be allowed. In their Appeal No.ST/30396/2018, the Learned Counsel for the appellant prayed that the Order-in-Appeal may be set aside in so far as it relates to the rejection of the refund of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce as having been rendered, it is not up to the recipient of the service to change the nature of service or dispute the classification of the service in order to file the refund claim. In this case, since the consultant has mentioned the nature of the service rendered as retainership service, the same cannot be changed by the appellant to claim it as scientific and technical consultancy services. He relied on the order of Learned Tribunal in the case of Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Ltd [2017 (3) GSTL 463 (Tri.-Del.)] in which it was categorically held that the recipient of service has no locus standi to change classification of service than on what was paid by the service provider . 6. I have considered the arguments on both sides ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
