9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- and rejected the amount of Rs. 1,09,850/-, after making following discussions and findings: "Discussion & Findings I have carefully gone through the claim for refund of service tax paid on specified services used for export of 'the said goods' along with all the documents furnished by 'the said claimant' in support of their refund claim of service tax under Notification No.41/2012-ST dated 29.06.2012 as amended for the period from 06.08.14 to 30.12.14 (LEO Date), the reasons of the Show Cause Notice and the submissions made by the said claimant. The findings are: I. -that 'the said claimant' has filed refund claim for Rs. 2,48,482/- on 05.08.15, which is within one year from the date of export of 'the said goods' in terms of para 3(g) of 'the said notification'; II. -that 'the said claimant' declared that no CENVAT credit of service tax paid on the specified service used for export of 'the said goods' has been taken under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004; III. -that the sale proceeds in respect of the export of 'the said goods' appears to have been realized by or on behalf of 'the said claimant' in India in terms of para 4 of 'the said notification' as evident from Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a (a), clause (A)(i) of the said notification. Hence, the said amount, i.e. Rs. 4,648/- is not admissible for refund. IX. -that an input service invoice of M/s. Bajaj Allianze General Insurance Co. Ltd. bearing no.0G-15-2401- 1011-00000831 dt. 29.12.14 for an amount of Rs. 143/- (Rupees One Hundred Forty Three) only is not in original. Hence said amount is inadmissible for refund in terms the said notification. Therefore, I find that an amount of Rs. 1,38,632/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Two) only, claimed by 'the said claimant' is admissible for refund of Service Tax paid on taxable specified services and an amount of Rs. 1,09,850/- (Rupees One Lakh Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty) only not admissible for refund in terms of the said notification there pass the following order:" 2. On appeal the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has held the appellant eligible to get refund of Rs. 143/- paid to M/s. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. He however, up held the Order-in-Original and modified the same to the extent of sanctioning the refund of Rs. 143/-. Hence the present appeal before the Tribunal. Sl. No. Shipping Bill No. & Date Discrepancie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntegra in view of the various decisions of the Tribunal holding a consistent view. I also find that this Bench in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax-II, Kolkata vs. SSK Exports Ltd. & others in Final Order No.FO/77622-77631/2017 in Appeal Nos. ST/76918, 76926, 76925, 76927, 76922, 76921/16, 76961, 76924, 76919 & 76923/16 wherein under similar circumstances, Revenue has contended that the refund claim for each shipping bill should be examined on individual basis instead of overall basis, has upheld the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) wherein it was held that there is no requirement to determine FOB value shipping bill wise to determine the formula enumerated in Para 1 (c) or in Para 3(i) of the notification and the rebate claim should be allowed in full when the assessee has specified the said condition on overall basis. The relevant paragraphs are reproduced below: "3. The main contention of the ld. A.R. for the Revenue, is that the respondent had not complied with the conditions of the Notification properly. The ld. A.R. for the Revenue reiterates the grounds of appeal. The main contention of the Revenue is that the particulars furnished in each and every column, mus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used for export of goods to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the factory of manufacture in Form A-1; (d) the exporter who is not so registered under the provisions referred to in clause (c), shall before filing a claim for rebate of service tax, file a declaration in Form A-2, seeking allotment of service tax code, to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the registered office or the head office, as the case may be, of such exporter; (e) the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, shall, after due verification, allot a service tax code number to the exporter referred to in clause (d), within seven days from the date of receipt of the said Form A-2; (f) on obtaining the service tax code, exporter referred to in clause (d), shall file the claim for rebate of service tax to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, shall, after satisfying himself,- (i) that the service tax rebate claim filed in Form A-1 is complete in every respect; (ii) that duly certified documents have been submitted evidencing the payment of service tax on the specified services ; (iii) that rebate has not been already received on the shipping bills or bills of export on the basis of procedure prescribed in paragraph 2; and (iv) that the rebate claimed is arithmetically accurate, refund the service tax paid on the specified service within a period of one month from the receipt of said claim : Provided that where the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, has reason to believe that the claim, or the enclosed documents are not in order or that there is a reason to deny such rebate, he may, after recording the reasons in writing, take action, in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and the rules made thereunder". 8.1 From the bare reading of the Notification, it is clear that rebate may be claimed on the service tax actually paid on any specified service used f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
