9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ICE TAX VI, MUMBAI VERSUS M/S. DBOI GLOBAL SERVICES P. LTD. [ 2018 (12) TMI 171 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - the disallowance of credit/refund on these invoices issued by M/s. Host India Events Marketing is unjustified. The appellant is eligible for credit/refund. Refund claim - Subscription Fee paid to Export Promotion Council for EOU, SEZ, and M/s. Nasscom - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Alliance Global Services IT India (P) Ltd., (supra) has analysed the very same issue and held that the credit is eligible. It also needs to be pointed out that in para 7.4 of the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the decision in the case ofM/S. MARUTI SUZUKI LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III [ 2009 (8) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT] to hold that the credit is not eligible - credit availed in respect of Subscription Fee paid on Export Promotion Council for EOU, SEZ and M/s. Nasscom are eligible for refund. Refund claim - Invoices issued by M/s. Beyond Square Solutions (P) Ltd. - Learned counsel has argued that though the nature of expenses is described in the invoices dated 15.05.2015 and 07.03.2015 by M/s. Beyond Square Solutions (P) L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as amended. 2. On the above refund claims, an amount of ₹ 17,96,289/- was sanctioned and the balance amount of ₹ 51,10,165/- was rejected on grounds in the nature that the credit availed is in respect of unregistered premises, discrepancy in input service invoices, ineligible input services, time bar, determination of total export turn over, FIRC not submitted etc. Out of the amount of ₹ 51,10,165 rejected, the appellants preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) for an amount of ₹ 34,25,831/-. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal No.310-313/2017, dated 31.10.2017, allowed the refund in respect of credit taken for the unregistered premises and remanded the matter in regard to the credit disallowed for reason of discrepancy in invoices. The Commissioner (Appeals) alsorejected the refund claim relating to Credit Rating Fee for obtaining bank loans and also upheld the rejection on the ground of time bar. The appellants did not prefer any appeal against the above order. However, in the remand proceedings, by Order-in-Original No.3/2019, dated 27.03.2019, it was held that the appellants are eligible for inp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Invoice not available contesting S Export Promotion Council for EOU and SEZ Subscription Fee 618 As per Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004 the Subscription Fee is not considered as input used in providing output service 0326, dt- 20.04.2015 M/s. Nasscom Subscription Fee 24,720 contesting BYS INV 0011, dt-15.05.2015 M/s. Beyond Square Solutions (P) Ltd. Subscription Fee 1,854 contesting 81, dt- 08.01.2015 M/s. Crave Infotech and Consultancy Services Consultancy Charges 65,904 Supplier s ST is not available due to LEGAL case at the supplier s end RC. Hence not eligible contesting ACS010, dt- 07.01.2015 M/s. AARTHU Consulting Services Consultancy Charges 15,750 Invoice s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... three invoices are with regard to Subscription Fee paid to Export Promotion Council (EPC) and Special Economic Zone (SEZ), M/s. Nasscom and M/s. Beyond Square Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Alliance Global Services IT India (P) Ltd., Vs CCE ST, Hyderabad-IV reported in 2016 (44) S.T.R.113 (Tri.-Hyd.) to argue that the fee paid for taking membership in Associations like American Chamber of Commerce in India, M/s. International Market Assessment India (P) Ltd., were held to be eligible for credit. It is explained by him that though it is noted in the invoice issued by M/s. Beyond Square Solutions (P) Ltd., that amount is paid towards Subscription Fee, in fact, the said amount is consideration paid by the appellants for providing the Software Services. He adverted to page no.95 of the appeal paper book. That though in the description of the services it is stated as monthly Subscription Fee for April, 2015, on the right corner of the invoice, it is shown as FOR: Software Services . He submitted that the said company, namely, M/s. Beyond Square Solutions (P) Ltd., is a software company which provides assistance to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unjustified. The appellant is eligible for credit/refund. 13. The learned counsel has submitted that the appellants are not contesting the issue of credit in respect of invoices issued by M/s. People Craft and M/s. Airtel. The rejection of refund claim in respect of these two invoices, dated 01.02.2015 and 31.02.2015 are upheld. 14. The authorities below have rejected the refund claim in respect of Subscription Fee paid to Export Promotion Council for EOU, SEZ, and M/s. Nasscom. The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Alliance Global Services IT India (P) Ltd., (supra) has analysed the very same issue and held that the credit is eligible. It also needs to be pointed out that in para 7.4 of the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the decision in the case of M/s. Maruti Suzuki Ltd. Vs CCE, Delhi-III reported in 2009 (240) E.L.T.641 (S.C.) to hold that the credit is not eligible. The said judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court is with regard to the interpretation of inputs and not input services . The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Alliance Global Services IT India (P) Ltd., (supra) had not discussed the same and observed as under:- It is seen that the autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e invoices are constant, which is ₹ 15,000/-. I cannot find any reason to assume that these expenses were for Software Services rendered by M/s. BSSPL to appellants.. It has also to be mentioned that the amount paid being constant for every month, it can only be that the amount is paid towards subscription. The appellants have not produced any evidence to support their arguments that M/s. BSSPL assisted them for providing software solutions and the expenses are incurred for such services and not Subscription Fee. For this reason, the rejection of credit on the invoices by M/s.BSSPL is upheld. 16. The next is with regard to credit/refund in respect of invoices issued by two Consultancy Services, namely, M/s. Crave Infotech and Consultancy Services and M/s. Dayadimensi India (P) Ltd. The reason for rejection of refund in respect of these invoices is that the invoices do not indicate the Service Tax Registration No. of the service provider. It is an omission on the part of service provider, which is beyond the control of the appellants, who is the service recipient. In the case of M/s. Mafatlal Industries P. Ltd., Vs CCE ST, Ahmedabad reported in 2020 (43) G.S.T.L. 562 (Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
