Appellant's CENVAT Credit Refund Granted: Not an Intermediary u/r 9; Services Qualify as Exports u/r 6A.

Refund of unutilised CENVAT credit paid - intermediary - There is no allegation that the appellant was involved in any way, either in purchase or sale of goods or even in the collection of sale proceeds from the customers of the company. By this alone, it can be safely concluded that the appellant is not acting as an agent or a middleman for anyone, and hence, is not covered by the mischief of the definition of ‘intermediary’ and consequently, Rule 9 of POP. Hence, the same cannot be held that there is no export of services under Rule 6A ibid. - AT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X